Top Enlisted and Officer to be selected by vote?

2014-03-25T03:52:11-04:00

If our top leaders were selected by a Vote from the men and women on service, will we be worrying about tattoos and side burns? Or we will be cleaning house from the top?
Picture from fav movie.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 25 at 2014 3:58 AM

2014-03-25T03:58:56-04:00

I think we would be cleaning house from the top.  Unfortunately it will never happen.  In the corporate world, it happens often that senior management is let go in order to achieve a cost savings.  They eliminate the higher salary individual and distribute what they were doing down to their subordinates (who was probably doing most of the work anyway).  In the government and military however, we do the opposite.  The higher ups cement their positions by mandating cuts to the lower ranks.  Will it ever change? Doubtful.

Response by SSG Oliver Mathews made Mar 25 at 2014 5:46 AM

2014-03-25T05:46:54-04:00

Elected Generals? I see this as being bad... there is no such thing as an Honest Politician... Making the military a political Battle you have just made it more corrupt, and Generals will be volleying for elections and handing out Promotions left and right for votes... Jus sayin.

clever picture btw

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 25 at 2014 12:04 PM

2014-03-25T12:04:28-04:00

That might be like letting my kids, by vote, let me know what there bed time should be.

Response by SGM Matthew Quick made Mar 25 at 2014 7:16 PM

2014-03-25T19:16:27-04:00

No...military command/leadership is NOT a popularity contest.

If you had a broader strategic thought (please find a good mentor) you may understand why these decisions are being made. These decisions are not being made by one or two people, but by a Board of Directors and then they branch out.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 26 at 2014 8:25 PM

2014-03-26T20:25:40-04:00

If Leaders today thought the military was getting too "soft" already, what would it be like if the Top Leadership was chosen because their policies were the most "likeable" and probably least demanding/restrictive? I don't see it as being effective but counter-productive to a disciplined military.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 26 at 2014 10:22 PM

2014-03-26T22:22:05-04:00

If the past few administrations and congresses have shown us anything, it's that just because someone wins election doesn't necessarily mean they're the best for the job. With the past two presidents, no less than 30% of the nation were pissed off with them at almost any given time. No one will ever make everyone happy, and the same thing is true of military leadership. In the case of the military, the fact of the matter is the leadership isn't there to make you happy, they're there to guide you in accomplishing the mission. You might not like it, but that was (largely) a decision to make before you raised your hand and said you would follow the orders of the President and the officers appointed over you.

The only way I could see this working is if the leadership were chosen by their peer group; the Chief of Staff of the Army chosen by the other 3-4 Stars in the Army, the leader the leaders recognize as the best among them.

A mass of Privates, Specialists, and junior Sergeants and Lieutenants simply doesn't have the experience and worldview necessary to make the best choice for the Army. I'd wager the same for any sister service as well.

Response by MSG Curtis Lange made Mar 28 at 2014 8:27 AM

2014-03-28T08:27:36-04:00

Election of leaders in the military is not a viable solution. Who would get to vote? Everyone? People currently working for the individual? People who left in a specific time before the election? People on orders to come into the unit?

The best we could hope for would be a 360 evaluation that was really looked at by the board...not much chance of that happening either.

We will have to wait and see what the new Officer Evaluation Ratings bring to the table. If it is anything like the past it won't take them long to figure out how to masage the numbers or bullets so that inflated evaluations are the norm and the Soldier which is fairly evaluated gets left behind.

Response by SFC James Baber made Mar 28 at 2014 11:10 AM

2014-03-28T11:10:43-04:00

I see that this type of environment would give us the same problem as we have in the country already, the popular would stay in power and continually abuse it after awhile as our current Congress and administration are doing daily to run the country into the ground, the same would also occur in the military, without the diversity of proper appointments and the moving around of Generals and senior officers, we would become stagnant and eventually corrupt in some manner or form along the way.

Response by SFC Benjamin Harrison made Mar 29 at 2014 2:24 PM

2014-03-29T14:24:14-04:00

Our Army would be weakend if our promotion system changed to a democracy. How and when would leaders have time to lead if they had to run a campaign? Would our leaders be capable of practicing "Selfless Service"? Bottom line, old heads like myself frequently reflect on what the Army ws like 10+ years ago, the one thing that has remained constant is the promtion system. I believe that conducting business in any other method would cause dissention in the Ranks and Corruption through the Service.

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 29 at 2014 3:25 PM

2014-03-29T15:25:07-04:00

SSG - being "worried about tattoos and sideburns" is not what our senior leaders are at the present moment. You're interpreting that from your very limited scope at your level. At the organizational and strategic level, the Army is focused on getting to the Congressionally-mandated force cap by 2017 within the limited budget that is currently set.

They're focused on the potential withdrawal of all US troops from Afghanistan by the end of the calendar year.

They're preoccupied with the continuity of care between the service and the VA as tens of thousands of service-connected disabled troops separate from service.

They're concerned about the concept of tiered readiness in the face of diminishing resources.

With those four things - just a few of dozens of serious issues - where do sideburns really stack? Tattoos? Really? Is that the focus at the squad an platoon level? I would tell you as a leader if your Soldiers are that worried about grooming issues than they need to seek employment elsewhere. Thank them for their service and wish them the best of luck.

Personally, I'm going to see the new AR 670-1 and be thankful that the Army has finally gotten around to consolidating the dozens of ALARACTs into a fully updated document so leaders at all levels can understand and enforce the standard. Again, if you and the standard don't quite agree, it's time for some solid introspection to determine if your goals and the Army's still align. If they don't, thank YOU for YOUR service, and the best of luck to you in your next endeavor.

Response by SSG Robert Burns made Mar 29 at 2014 5:20 PM

2014-03-29T17:20:59-04:00

Im pretty sure our boss is selected by vote.

Response by COL Jason Smallfield, PMP, CFM, CM made Apr 23 at 2014 5:41 PM

2014-04-23T17:41:21-04:00

A historical perspective may be of benefit when considering if the top enlisted and officer are to be selected by vote. Before the American Revolution, militia officers were selected by popular vote of the organizations that they led. While this allowed for leaders who were popular, it led to a wide variance in leaders who were effective and it led to leader decisions that were popular rather than necessary militarily. Simply stated, there was a wide shot group on quality and effective leaders. During the American Civil War, many military leaders were appointed due to their political connections rather than their military skills. Again, some were effective while many were not. This translated in both cases to unnecessary deaths on the battlefield. Therefore should we elect our top enlisted and officer in the Army? My answer is: be careful what you wish for. You just might get get.

Response by CPT Thomas Monahan made Jun 14 at 2020 5:54 PM

2020-06-14T17:54:19-04:00

Militias often voted in their “Company Captain” and some other officers. Other times the leaders were selected and told to “raise” a company or battalion. Raise also meant pay for the troops. Today we have professional organizations for regulars (note officers don’t buy commissions like the colonial era Brits did) and militia (National Guard) that have an ever improving process to place recruit, train, develop and place leaders.