Should the DoD redesign its medals and ribbons policy and precedence to give more importance to valor than "good work"?

We have too many participation medals and ribbons, not to mention the obscene subjectivity that is the award system.
NCOPD ribbon - useless. Rank is tied to NCOPD
Good Conduct Medal - we should not reward "just staying out of trouble"
Army Service Ribbon - why, just why?

The current system is rife with problems....
1) It was easier back in the day to get a Medal Of Honor than it is today. Point in reference, look at all the awards during WWII when the citation reads "single handedly took out a machine gun nest". However, today, you almost always have to die, and a machine gun nest is not enough, you now have to single handedly take on nearly a Division.
2) Awards these days are not indicative of what an award is for.... It does not matter what rank someone is compared to the action they performed... I am getting tired of PVT Smith taking on an entire Company by himself, but can't get above an ARCOM due to his rank, but a 1LT who hides under his bunk gets a Bronze Star. Awards should be for merit and should never have anything to do with rank!
3) How many awards are downgraded because they "can't present the award in time"? That is complete B.S., I had 2 ARCOMs downgraded to AAMs because I PCS'd before they could get me the award. Basically, why is the Soldier punished because of a command that can't get their shit together?
4) There is no consistency between units; in one unit it takes an act of God to get an award, but in another, they hand awards out like candy!

Get rid of training ribbons, GWOT-S (everyone gets that plus a NDSM... don’t need both), all the medals that only generals and admirals are eligible for, and maybe pare down some of the other medals (ie: Air Medal, Arial Achievement Medal, and DFC- just award Commendation Medal, MSM, BSM, or Silver Star instead... maybe add a device to denote flight if that is important to have). Additionally, reduce the number of service medals for things like nuclear deterrence, etc (if your job is to deal with nukes, why should you get a medal just for doing your job?!?).

CPO (Join to see) I think you give a valid point where our service members who are down range, regardless of job, are often asked to do multiple jobs at once while being closer to the”front” so to speak. This is certainly a different paradigm than during WWII where the majority of service members were never in combat nor near the front, or asked to perform jobs generally well out of there rating.

I agree that many “good job awards” are very important. Even on stateside duty if you have gone above and beyond in your job you deserve recognition for a job well done. AAMs, ARCOMs, and their other service equivalents serve an important role.

I do think we need to streamline, however. I know for one we had major headaches overseas and butthyrt feelings trying to see who qualified for what - are we getting JSAMs or JCOMs or just ARCOMS, etc. It becomes very murky and even murkier when commanders aren’t on the same page as to what is worthy of what or who for that matter. I get the feeling as others pointed out that awards then get based more on bias/personal knowledge of th individual rather than their work.

Two fixes: first, greater education on awards and the process needs to be in place. Along with this is perhaps, much as promotions should be the same way, blotch out demographics and go more so on the actual content for what the award is for. Perfect? No, but a start.

Other. Make Army Unit Awards the same size as the other branches unit awards... Tired of my unit awards looking all wonky...

I think the issue isn't how much is out there it's the liberal dispensation to troops based on rank. I am prior service Marines and moved over to the guard. As a new E4/Cpl I was a plt Sgt in Iraq as a Marine, I got a meritorious mast. A soldier I served with after transition to the guard received a bronze star for the same job as an E6. It comes down to awards that are earned by actions valor or achievement not because of rank.

It (your time) don't mean a thing, if you ain't got that bling... ;-)

I agree that our awards system is broken. I don't think moving valor awards to the right is the answer though. In the last 70 years we've gone from Soldiers leaving the service with zero awards to nearly everyone above the rank of E4 looking like a 3rd world country dictator. There needs to be some balance. There also needs to be a level of scarcity in order for an award to be meaningful. With that said, here are my suggestions on fixing awards bloat:

1. Merge service specific and joint "good job" medals into one award. A Defense Achievement Medal, Defense Commendation Medal, Defense Meritorious Service Medal, and Defense Distinguished Service Medal would all still accomplish the same intent, but eliminate a lot of the "clutter" discussed in the article.

2. Most of the "gimmes" could probably go away as well. The Army Service Ribbon, for example, is essentially an award for graduating basic training. The NCO Professional Development ribbon is literally a ribbon for completing a required school. The Army Reserve Component Achievement Medal is essentially a "Good Conduct Medal" for Officers and a redundant good conduct medal for enlisted personnel.

3. ARNG State awards should also be reviewed. To provide some context, California alone has 20 state level awards. I think it's certainly appropriate to recognize RC Soldiers who mobilize for emergency response and other SAD missions. However, instead of each state awarding their own medal I think we should have one award recognized by the Title 10 force. Likewise, I would support eliminating state good conduct medals in favor of awarding the federal award. State Achievement and Commendation Medals could also be eliminated in favor of the Federal Awards. Finally, do we really need a recruiting ribbon? In my opinion an achievement medal would be just as appropriate for someone who excels in recruiting.

4. I agree with the article that valor awards should receive more recognition. However, instead of moving them why not just reduce the amount of "good job" awards above the BSM? Do we really need multiple awards that will only be earned by COLs and above?

5. The Army Overseas Service Ribbon and the Army Reserve Component Overseas Training ribbon could be merged into one overseas service ribbon. Are two separate awards really necessary? For that matter, is it really necessary to award the overseas service ribbon for combat service when you receive overseas service bars as well?

6. The Armed Forces Reserve Medal could also be eliminated or reformed. It's yet another award based solely on time in service, without even requiring good conduct. It can also be awarded for mobilization as a RC Soldier, but we already receive campaign medals for that. In either case the award's intent is already accomplished by other existing awards.

7. The GWOTSM should also be removed or reformed. We already have the NDSM which recognizes service during a time of war. If anything I would recommend the GWOTSM be reserved for recognition for CONUS mobilizations/deployments in support of the GWOT.

8. The MOVSM could also be eliminated. While volunteer work is certainly a positive thing, this medal's purpose could easily be accomplished by an achievement or commendation medal. I would argue that volunteer work is not so critical to the military's mission that it needs it's own award.

Before anyone gets their hackles up, many of my suggestions would eliminate awards I hold as well. The intent is not to denigrate anyone's service. I just feel like our awards have become borderline superfluous. The awards I'm most proud of are my campaign medals. They're the ones I feel like I truly earned. The rest were basically awarded for showing up.

Personally, I think awards of valor should be honored by wearing the actual medal, while others should just be the ribbon.

Two rows of three ribbons, starting with highest. Three badges