You can run fast, but you can't turn on a computer. Should you be getting promoted?

It is a generational thing for the most part. Some of the soldiers in my generation grew up when the Nintendo NES was "state of the art". The technology gap is improving each and every year. Can you believe this? When I came in, typing was a marketable skill. A large percentage of soldiers could not type. In fact, my first counseling statements were hand written.

SPC Z.,

Many years ago (Back in the late '80's, early 90's), the Army did test the Soldier's knowledge in their particular MOS by having them take the Skill Qualification Test or SQT. From what I recall, all enlisted MOSs in all skill levels had to take the SQT. At one time, it was even added to the Soldier's promotion points for E-5 and E-6. The SQT's stopped counting to the Soldier's promotion points after 1990 (I think) and did away with the SQT all together either in 1993. I had taken the SQT twice, once when I was a PFC and the last time when I was a SGT.
I know that I'm no longer serving, but I believe that the Army should bring the SQT back, especially when they're trying to downsize.  

I am right there with you on this... Technical jobs need BRAINS not muscle! (Though I will say that having BOTH is definitely a plus!) the brains in this instance should count higher. I have something of a personal issue in this situation (if you are at all curious as to why, read my profile) but I learned to live with it and in the end, karma ruled the day! Anyway, good luck trying to make that point these days... (At one time, Specialists and Technical Sergeants had a meaning just that! Too bad it all got lumped into the same pool.)

It has always been so. Strong as a gorilla, fast as a horse, dumber than a sack of rocks. But he/she will still be looked upon more favorably that someone who excels at their job but only scores a 190-200 APFT....

in the second paragraph of the NCO creed: I will be technically and tactically proficient.

There is no excuse for an NCO to not both know their job and be technically competent enough to perform it. Yes we must maintain physical fitness as well, but I agree that your ability to do your actual primary job should be our first concern.

While this isn't 'easily quantifiable', there is a section on the NCOER for technical competence. Sadly though, too many raters are quick to give out high ratings to undeserving NCOs, which even though it seems like they're helping them, only hurts their self development. It quickly becomes a game of trying to get bullets throughout the year for those ratings of excellent. This should be addressed, but I won't even pretend to know where to begin other than promise that I'll try to do better when I'm responsible for rating a soldier.

As an HR professional, I am to be a technical expert in processing actions for the units I manage. I am expected to have a knowledge base of regulations and procedures to accomplish my Commander's mission to meet and maintain manpower needs. When new changes occur, I need to adapt and integrate personnel actions that support the Commander's intent. If I encounter an obstacle, I need to be able to negotiate it so that I can meet expectations. This is part of the Adjutant Generals creed.

The Adjutant Generals Corps creed also reads:

"I will be prepared to fight as infantry when my Commander calls."

I am a Soldier too. We all went through an initial training first before we all trained to do our daily job, but we're also expected to be able to shoot, move, and communicate.

I believe that combat arms professionals have a symetric role in the military. Their job is to bring the fight to the enemy as that is what they've learned in basi and their AIT. I would expect leadership; however, to be able to do skill level one tasks on a computer.

If you can't do your primary MOS? No, absolutely not, you should not get promoted. The Army is downsizing, and it doesn't need to retain useless people.

That being said, this is the military. Everybody is expected to be in fighting shape, regardless of MOS, because there's always the remote chance that someone will try and kill the Admin guy inside the wire. We're soldiers first; everybody gets some kind of tactical training through either basic or commissioning source, and physical fitness is so inextricably tied to performing those basic soldier functions that we can't not take it into account when deciding who to promote/retain.

When I was deployed as a junior Captain, I worked with a Major who was the G1 for the command. Wonderful as a person, but she had a permanent profile that kept her from doing much of any PT *and* even as G1 was so deficient in computers that she had to take remedial courses in Microsoft Office just to do her job.

The personnel branch does pretty much everything on computers, and she was worse than useless as she dragged the rest of the shop down by her lack of skills (lucky there was one fantastic SFC who stepped up to get things done).

I'm still trying to figure out how she made it to Major at all, given that she lacked either the physical requirements of the army or the professional requirements of her field... And for the record, the remedial courses didn't help.

That's a great statement and I think it is an issue that need to be addressed. One of the things I love about the military is it slow change and history. However, the world around the military changes at a rapid pace. A soldier that does not know how to operate a computer will have a very hard life. Not only in the military but civilian word as well. Second, we do an injustice to soldiers of all ranks by not giving them these skills. Think about how many systems in the military today utilize some type of computer; now add a Soldier, SGT, SSG, MAG, ETC to the equation, that has no idea of the equipment capabilities beyond the label. Computer skills not only impact MOS that directly work with them but Mechanic need computer skills, Supply, 12Bs, 11B, Everyone. Third, Competition of Civilian sector VS Military personal. While some service members can slip by without know anything about a computer in the military, in civilian life that may not be the case. Many job require MS office, Excel, ETC. Plus a leader that does not have to rely on a younger solder to turn on his computer would be more efficient at his or her job.

SPC Zandlo, as a SSG in a highly technical position, I can definitely agree with your assessment, but I have some caveats.

For ever Soldier, Sailor, Airman, and Marine in our armed forces, there are that many sets of circumstances. Sometimes leader reclassifies to a new MOS and has to rapidly absorb a huge amount of information to bring them to a point where others int he field consider them "competent." Sometimes they are thrust into a position outside of their scope and have to deal with it as best they can. There are leaders who will go the extra distance and gain that technical understanding, and there are those who will do the bare minimum.

As far as Army NCOs go, we have a creed. In that creed is the line "I will strive to remain technically and tactically proficient." While it may seem at times that the technical isn't being taken into account, I can assure you that at some point, it will come into play. Granted, nobody gets "flagged" for lack of technical competence, but it will take them longer to promote, and limit how far they will go. In the meantime, I see your frustration and the best advice I can give you is to TACTFULLY do what you can to let those leaders know they are lacking, offer any assistance you can, and when all else fails, drive on. A good leader needs to know their limitations and work to overcome them.