Should an officer/NCO be required to hold a leadership position prior to being a primary staff officer/NCO?

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 31 Jul 2014 18:23:45 -0400

I have seen throughout my years that there is a big difference in staff officers who have been in leadership positions previously and those who never held a leadership position. You can tell by how they care and work with you. It appears (to me) that straight lifetime staffers are more about mission and metrics and the previous leaders and more about assisting you and bending to make the mission happen and not hurt the personnel in the process.

Do you feel that before becoming a primary staff officer/NCO that they should be in a leadership prior?

Response by CW2 Ernest Krutzsch made Jul 31 at 2014 7:01 PM

CW2 Ernest Krutzsch — Thu, 31 Jul 2014 19:01:20 -0400

Very difficult issue, I don't think an officer has a choice where he/she is positioned, that said, as a Warrant, I sought positions of leadership, and staff positions. I was an S2 for an MI Battalion, and the CI Chief for a G2 in an Infantry Division. I think it is important for the individual officer to seek those positions that round out his/her career. I have seen many great staff officers who were also great leaders, I don't think position dictates!

Response by SSG Robert Pierce made Jul 31 at 2014 7:27 PM

SSG Robert Pierce — Thu, 31 Jul 2014 19:27:53 -0400

The reason I said no is because an NCO is already a Leader of Soldiers. However; I feel that all Leaders and NCO's need to be a Staff Leader early in their career because it gives them time to grow. Lastly; I also think that their first line supervisor should shadow them along the way.

Response by CPT Chase Sanger made Jul 31 at 2014 9:14 PM

CPT Chase Sanger — Thu, 31 Jul 2014 21:14:28 -0400

For a lot of branches (mine included), the career track starts you as a Battalion Staff Officer first (generally). It gives you the experience of working directly for a BN XO and a high-pressure environment where you get a bunch of additional duties. I found my time on staff to be a great learning experience and I took each task that I was assigned head on. It's probably different for every branch and situation, but for me it was a great progression from Battalion Staff to Company Executive Officer.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 3 at 2014 1:26 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 03 Sep 2014 13:26:32 -0400

I think it is helpful, but not always possible, especially in the Reserve components. Some branches simply don't have the opportunity for leadership positions. For example, when I commissioned as a 2LT, I was a Chemical Officer in a state with no chemical units, and was assigned to a battalion staff. I later changed to Signal, and became the S-6 and Signal PL for the same battalion, but if I had stayed in my initial branch I probably would never have had any opportunity for leadership positions.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 5 at 2014 10:24 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 05 Sep 2014 22:24:16 -0400

We once had an Officer Candidate who announced that he did not have any desire to be a Platoon Leader - he did not want to lead troops - he did not want to deal with Soldier issues. He was there because "A lieutenant makes more than a private". Said Officer Candidate did not make it through OCS and because of his contract...became a Specialist.

Officer/Warrant/NCO - we are all Leaders by the very virtue of our rank and position.

Now before they become a Staff Officer/NCO should they have held a Leadership position. In my book - absolutely.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 5 at 2014 11:32 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 05 Sep 2014 23:32:18 -0400

As you know many try to avoid staff. In my branch we are pretty much guaranteed PL time. But as stated in other comments some are in a branch where they are destined for lengthy career in staff. I don't fault them but it would be preferred for all NCOs and Officers to have held a leadership position.

Response by Capt Chris McVeigh made Sep 6 at 2014 1:57 AM

Capt Chris McVeigh — Sat, 06 Sep 2014 01:57:53 -0400

Everyone should have the opportunity to lead troops before being put in a staff position, it is a central part of being an officer. As you continue your career, the opportunities become fewer and fewer to be in a command position so every effort should be made to put junior officers in this role. It broadens your experience and gives you additional perspectives on how things work.

All officers should serve in staff positions at some point, but that is pretty much a guarantee if they continue their career so the goal early on should be leadership and command.

Response by LtCol Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 6 at 2014 11:55 AM

LtCol Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 06 Sep 2014 11:55:12 -0400

I think in an ideal world, yes. And a well-rounded officer is a good leader and good at staff work. But everyone has different strengths and weaknesses. I've met officers who are natural born leaders and I would follow them to hell and back, but they can't type a coherent sentence or give a good brief. And I've met officers who can't lead themselves out of a wet paper bag but they can be useful for staff work.

In the military, we can't really fire our employees so we have to take what have and make the best of it. It's all about knowing your people and placing them in billets where they will be able to contribute to the overall mission.

Response by SSG Ed Mikus made Sep 13 at 2014 9:18 AM

SSG Ed Mikus — Sat, 13 Sep 2014 09:18:45 -0400

I think it should be a requirement, but not one with any strict enforcement.

Response by SFC William Swartz Jr made Sep 13 at 2014 9:23 AM

SFC William Swartz Jr — Sat, 13 Sep 2014 09:23:48 -0400

My personnel opinion, based on my own experience, is yes they should. But, we all know that a lot of times certain staff positions are filled by NCOs and Junior Officers who are awaiting a leadership slot, or looked as less than desirable for one. I served as the S-2 NCOIC during OIF-III with the same BN I had been a Tank PLT PSG during OIF and I think having been in that position prior, helped me a great deal. Later on I served as the OPs NCOIC for ASG-Kuwait in support of OEF/OIF/OND and again it helped me having had my leadership positions prior to serving on staff.

Response by COL Vincent Stoneking made Sep 13 at 2014 9:29 AM

COL Vincent Stoneking — Sat, 13 Sep 2014 09:29:01 -0400

I think it is important to note that the two roles are fundamentally different. One is (primarily) about the Art of Command, while the other is all about the Science of Management (in support of Command).

This distinction drives the differences and also what makes someone good at one job vice the other. Quite simply, the staffer SHOULD be all about mission and metrics. Their JOB is to support their commander's intent and give him/her the information needed to make intelligent decisions. And then enforce those decision. They are not SUPPOSED to be exercising direct leadership in these roles. They are indirect roles by design and intent.

Direct leaders have a different purpose. They need to analyze the info they have and make the best decisions balancing the needs of the mission, the unit, and the people.

Different people do these jobs better or worse based on personality, training, temperament, knowledge, and seasoning. I advocate fitting Officers to the jobs they are best suited to, where they can make the best contribution to the overall organization.

I am fond of the British system, as explained to me, where an officer makes a selection several years into their career to either be a line or a staff specialist from there on in. I am also in favor of doing away with the lockstep up or out method we currently employ for officer retention. Quite simply, one can be a ROCKSTAR S3 or S4, who should NEVER lead troops.

However, to answer your actual question: I believe that before someone becomes an BC, they should have had significant staff experience. I believe that before someone becomes a primary staff Officer, they should have significant time with troops/units -though not necessarily as a commander. This is not for "leadership" per se. This is so they can translate what the charts in the books say to what will really happen as a result of the plans they write.

Response by SSG Kevin McCulley made Sep 15 at 2014 12:21 AM

SSG Kevin McCulley — Mon, 15 Sep 2014 00:21:38 -0400

Some Soldiers are good staff members. Some Soldiers are good direct leaders. Some Soldiers are neither. :)

I served in leadership roles before my time on a brigade and then a division staff. Honestly at first, it was a hindrance to me. I was told I was too angry. :) I thankfully had an outstanding field grade Artillery officer who was transitioning back to staff himself that helped simmer me down quite a bit. I learned the invaluable lessons, like trying to anticipate everything the commander could possibly ask before setting foot in his office and so many others. Once I understood that you have to approach a staff like a living Rube Goldberg machine where turning the right knob, lighting the right candle, and throwing the right switch is far more effective than busting in like a bull in a china shop.

Once I learned that, my leadership experience started to pay dividends as you have the ability to see outside the staff bubble and say, "wait.. wait.. wait.. If we do this, someone is going to blow up the building." Being a successful staff NCO/Officer is about being a master of human interaction and networking. You then leverage that network to get things accomplished without stepping on toes and with a well built consensus.

Once you've achieved that, going back into a higher level of command/leadership, those staff skills can work wonders at large scale organization, especially in the patience department. It is kind of like a chicken or the egg kind of an argument. All I can say is that while not everyone is cut out for command or critical leadership billets, time on a staff is still important. You learn so much about what the shops can really bring to the table (for some reason, no one ever seems to ask?). When you can get into an "I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine" that serves the command and the mission, it is gravy! It's also gives some pretty good job satisfaction. Of course, all this goes out the window if your staff is about as functional is an IPad after the EMP Apocalypse.

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Sep 15 at 2014 8:08 AM

SFC Michael Hasbun — Mon, 15 Sep 2014 08:08:38 -0400

I'm inclined to go the opposite route. A great deal of the skills learned in a staff position will help you in a leadership position.

Formal writing, counseling, time management, tact, humility, public speaking, Powerpoint (sadly), computer skills, information management, and countless other skills are crucial to being a leader in todays Army.

You can be the reincarnation of Audie Murphy and Chest Puller's love child, but none of that matters if you can't manage your people, the ocean of paperwork, the countless taskings, schools, and training requirements, and no one's being counseled/rated.

Response by MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca made Sep 15 at 2014 9:37 AM

MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca — Mon, 15 Sep 2014 09:37:48 -0400

I believe leadership is one of the primary goals of both the O & E sides of the house and should have precedence over a staff position for E5s and O1s. IMHO those are the initial ranks for leadership and that is where the initial evaluation can be made on leadership potential. From there, SMs can be guided and mentored to fulfill their potential. There are some who make better unit leaders, some who are better on staff and some who are good at both. Staff or unit, leadership is involved in both and needs to be fostered as early as possible. Personally - my own assessment - I was a good company commander, but I was a better S-6 with a small close knit section. Had I stayed in I would have stayed the staff route, maybe Bde XO or State HQ DOIM or S-6.

Response by SGT Marvin "Dave" Bigham made Sep 15 at 2014 10:05 AM

SGT Marvin "Dave" Bigham — Mon, 15 Sep 2014 10:05:25 -0400

I'm all for attempting to "round" our NCO/Officers, but we all know those who can't lead a line through a speed-lace boot. There are also great leaders that have a hard time holding their tongue and performing well in a staff position. I say, give them a shot to learn and excel in new situations, BUT we should always post our military members in the position they best fit not necessarily where the manual says they should go. (Too many NCO/Officers rely on their assistant to lead the troops under their command and post a danger to their safety and success rate.)

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 15 at 2014 11:32 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 15 Sep 2014 11:32:05 -0400

This is a simple answer for me.

Lets say you have that lifetime staff officer riding in a M1151 on a patrol, and the patrol is hit...hard, and all the unit leadership is incapacitated. Joe Snuffy is going to look to him/her for leadership regardless of experience, due to the rank on the uniform. Would you want someone with at least a platoon leader's experience in that situation? I know I would.

The other part of this is already out there, mission and metrics are nothing without people. You have to understand the human aspect of the men and women in your command before you can effectively manage metrics.

And with that I'll make a final point. We need leaders, not managers. If you are more comfortable managing metrics, that is all good and well...but there has to be an understanding that you may be called upon to lead whether you like it or not.

As all things are, its METT-TC dependent.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 15 at 2014 3:22 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 15 Sep 2014 15:22:57 -0400

When i was an army rotc cadet before i decided to enlist i found that superiors who had held a leadership position previously had a better understanding/ feeling for how to acheive the mission. I found this is also the case with NCOs on the enlisted side. On that note, i would also make the point that my favorite officers(in my opinion) were the ones who were NCO, however by no means am i saying officers that haven't held the rank of sergeant are ill equipped

Response by SGT Alicia Brenneis made Sep 15 at 2014 6:45 PM

SGT Alicia Brenneis — Mon, 15 Sep 2014 18:45:21 -0400

Yes is all I really have to say. An NCO who has never been a leader should not be placed in a senior leader position, ever.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 19 at 2015 6:36 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 19 Apr 2015 18:36:43 -0400

Having leadership time would greatly help NCOS and Officers while on staff. In my opinion too many staff officers and NCOs forget that they are their to support their subordinate units...not the other way around. For officers, having command time prior to assuming duties as a staff officer might help them better understand the relationship.