Avatar feed
Responses: 8
MSG Inspector General
7
7
0
I find interesting the results of the study however, there needs to be more studies to find the durect correlation between attrition and retention due to the claims the article makes. I have met some high speed 7s in 7 that did not have that experience and their performance shows, they were toxic and made soldiers hate life in the Army. Maybe is time to rethink promotions and Retention control points to change TIS and TIG requirements. Good share.
(7)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
1LT William Clardy
6
6
0
It looks like someone was bored enough to play amateur statistician (did anybody else notice the absence of any mention of error margins?).
The trouble with any single-metric "analysis" like this is that they have as much potential for offering a useful insight as trying to measure what makes a useful home by measuring the dimensions of a bunch of houses. Ease of measurement doesn't equate to significance.
(6)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
1SG First Sergeant
5
5
0
“Not until a soldier is up for E-7, when they are interviewed by a board and have to articulate their leadership experience and philosophy, does the Army begin to really hone in on those skills.” Fail.
(5)
Comment
(0)
MSG Zac Walton
MSG Zac Walton
>1 y
A board really tests only one aspect of a person's strengths and that is, in my opinion, the ability to articulate under pressure. A Soldier might be stellar under combat, facing an ethical dilemma in garrison, and when not in uniform, but might not be articulate at a board. I do recognize that there are some inherent skills such as giving briefings that might translate directly to board performance, but I feel the argument still holds that a board is not a holistic approach.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close