8
8
0
Here's a problem I've always had with the Army. Not sure if the other forces do it too, but here goes. I don't understand their thinking of 'move up or get out.' They force people to be leaders. Even now at a time when it is evident that quick promotions are hurting the Army leadership. Even though self improvement is a good thing, it doesn't mean everyone wants to be the one in charge. When I compare this line of thinking to the civilian world I believe the civilian world is doing it right. If a soldier or employee is happy where they are at, then let them stay in that position. If they look for a promotion then promote them.
So lets compare. We have a soldier who is a mechanic and a civilian who works at the local repair shop. They both like their job. They both know their job. And they both are happy right were they are. Neither are looking to run the shop. They both just want to turn wrenches and be thankful for their paycheck. Now the boss comes by and says, 'Hey we have an opening for promotion.' They both say 'Thanks, I'm good where I'm at. The civilian gets to keep their job and the soldier gets forced out. The civilian company keeps a trained employee while the military looses one, who they paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to train, feed and house. The civilian company doesn't have to hire a new employee, while the military does, which costs even more money.
I could never figure the Army reasoning out. So will someone please try to explain the benefits of this. There will always be somebody who wants to wear the crown. Let them. And let the others do what they want to do. Thanks and have a good one.
So lets compare. We have a soldier who is a mechanic and a civilian who works at the local repair shop. They both like their job. They both know their job. And they both are happy right were they are. Neither are looking to run the shop. They both just want to turn wrenches and be thankful for their paycheck. Now the boss comes by and says, 'Hey we have an opening for promotion.' They both say 'Thanks, I'm good where I'm at. The civilian gets to keep their job and the soldier gets forced out. The civilian company keeps a trained employee while the military looses one, who they paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to train, feed and house. The civilian company doesn't have to hire a new employee, while the military does, which costs even more money.
I could never figure the Army reasoning out. So will someone please try to explain the benefits of this. There will always be somebody who wants to wear the crown. Let them. And let the others do what they want to do. Thanks and have a good one.
Posted in these groups: 
Promotions
Promotions
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 15
10
10
0
SSG Adam Reed
What you described is exactly what is wrong with the Army. You have young Soldiers and NCOs that think of the service as a job. They don't think of themselves as specialists or sergeants, they think of themselves as E-4s and E-5s. It's just a paycheck not a responsibility.
Developing leaders is Army doctrine. Like COL Jean (John) F. B. said, one needs to be prepared to take charge and lead other Soldiers regardless of MOS. If you are a great mechanic the Army wants you to teach others to be great mechanics. If that mechanic remains stagnant he/she is holding a position that prevents others from moving up that want to lead.
What you described is exactly what is wrong with the Army. You have young Soldiers and NCOs that think of the service as a job. They don't think of themselves as specialists or sergeants, they think of themselves as E-4s and E-5s. It's just a paycheck not a responsibility.
Developing leaders is Army doctrine. Like COL Jean (John) F. B. said, one needs to be prepared to take charge and lead other Soldiers regardless of MOS. If you are a great mechanic the Army wants you to teach others to be great mechanics. If that mechanic remains stagnant he/she is holding a position that prevents others from moving up that want to lead.
(10)
(0)
Cpl Michael Strickler
CSM (Join to see), I agree with the majority of your response on principle, however simply being content with one’s status is not a sign of seeing the service as a job. Consider this mechanic requesting deployment on a continuous basis, teaching those in his shop the trade he knows, being the first to raise his hand, etc. He does it for the pride in his work and the benefit it has as a cog in the wheel of our great military. I would take that service member over someone itching for advancement any day, because I know he is more concerned with his mission than the next stripe (and usually pay increase).
One of the many reasons I left the service was because one of the senior leaders in my unit told us that our positions were exactly a job and nothing more. That it was a job like any other. He was not there to be a part of the tradition and history that made the United States Marine Corps what it is today. He is one of the many counter examples of how simply wishing for advancement does not help keep the values and esprit de corps alive.
It is about the individual’s pride, not their desire for more power, stripes, money, position, etc. that determines their worth in our services. One of my biggest pros to staying in was being the guy that makes it to the top and has the ability to make change and bring back some of that tradition. Toughing it out for thirty years or whatever so that future generations could benefit instead of letting it spiral away and saying it is not my problem.
Part of me feels ashamed for getting out and “leaving my men to the hounds” but having seen so many great Marines pushed out and so many average Marines propelled into prominence (among other things) I felt alone in my desire to bring back the “old core.”
One of the many reasons I left the service was because one of the senior leaders in my unit told us that our positions were exactly a job and nothing more. That it was a job like any other. He was not there to be a part of the tradition and history that made the United States Marine Corps what it is today. He is one of the many counter examples of how simply wishing for advancement does not help keep the values and esprit de corps alive.
It is about the individual’s pride, not their desire for more power, stripes, money, position, etc. that determines their worth in our services. One of my biggest pros to staying in was being the guy that makes it to the top and has the ability to make change and bring back some of that tradition. Toughing it out for thirty years or whatever so that future generations could benefit instead of letting it spiral away and saying it is not my problem.
Part of me feels ashamed for getting out and “leaving my men to the hounds” but having seen so many great Marines pushed out and so many average Marines propelled into prominence (among other things) I felt alone in my desire to bring back the “old core.”
(1)
(0)
CSM (Join to see)
Cpl Michael Strickler
I agree with your philosophy but I think your answer is directed more toward specific "bad" leaders. If you truly are a subject matter expert and a good leader those traits should follow you throughout your career path. I understand it's not always the case and some leaders feel they are entitled because "they have been there, done that".
I still believe that you should always strive to better yourself, whether by earning rank in the military or climbing the corporate ladder in the civilian world. The more people you are responsible for, the more opportunity you have to share your knowledge and experience.
I agree with your philosophy but I think your answer is directed more toward specific "bad" leaders. If you truly are a subject matter expert and a good leader those traits should follow you throughout your career path. I understand it's not always the case and some leaders feel they are entitled because "they have been there, done that".
I still believe that you should always strive to better yourself, whether by earning rank in the military or climbing the corporate ladder in the civilian world. The more people you are responsible for, the more opportunity you have to share your knowledge and experience.
(1)
(0)
Cpl Michael Strickler
CSM (Join to see), I feel the same way. I also think that some people just are not "built" to lead. Some people may be great in their job or whatever, but may not be able to direct people for some reason. Just like someone may be a great leader, but have no clue what their people "do."
(1)
(0)
7
7
0
SSG Adam Reed
The first problem with your argument is that you are trying to compare the military with a civilian occupation. That could be pertinent if the military was an organization that was perpetually in a garrison environment, which, of course is not the case.
All military personnel need to be prepared to assume leadership roles, as pointed out by SMSGT Thomas. One never knows when the situation will require that mechanic you discussed to take charge and be responsible for other soldiers.
In addition, the military needs people who are motivated to better themselves, not just be content with the status quo. It is not enough to simply want to be the best mechanic.
Our military needs a constant stream of young, healthy soldiers in the lower ranks, not a bunch of older, less fit and unmotivated individuals.
People who have no ambition for advancement have no place in the military beyond their initial enlistment.
The first problem with your argument is that you are trying to compare the military with a civilian occupation. That could be pertinent if the military was an organization that was perpetually in a garrison environment, which, of course is not the case.
All military personnel need to be prepared to assume leadership roles, as pointed out by SMSGT Thomas. One never knows when the situation will require that mechanic you discussed to take charge and be responsible for other soldiers.
In addition, the military needs people who are motivated to better themselves, not just be content with the status quo. It is not enough to simply want to be the best mechanic.
Our military needs a constant stream of young, healthy soldiers in the lower ranks, not a bunch of older, less fit and unmotivated individuals.
People who have no ambition for advancement have no place in the military beyond their initial enlistment.
(7)
(0)
COL Jean (John) F. B.
I agree someone can be uninterested in promotions and still be motivated. My opinion is that the military is the wrong place for a person with that attitude.
I knew many outstanding young soldiers who had no interest in advancement and were simply in the Army to get money for college or to bide their time and get experience and veterans preference so they could be civilian law enforcement officers when they met the age requirements. Many of those, by the way, changed their minds and decided to stay in and became outstanding NCOs.
The military is unique and cannot be easily equated to civilian careers. I will stick to my opinion that soldiers who do want to progress in rank and responsibility have no place in the military after their initial enlistment.
I knew many outstanding young soldiers who had no interest in advancement and were simply in the Army to get money for college or to bide their time and get experience and veterans preference so they could be civilian law enforcement officers when they met the age requirements. Many of those, by the way, changed their minds and decided to stay in and became outstanding NCOs.
The military is unique and cannot be easily equated to civilian careers. I will stick to my opinion that soldiers who do want to progress in rank and responsibility have no place in the military after their initial enlistment.
(0)
(0)
COL Jean (John) F. B.
SGT David Schreiner
You make some very good points. Very well stated.
I totally agree with you. People should not be promoted who are not prepared to lead. That does not mean that people should not work towards getting promoted. I have stated in a great many promotion ceremonies that the promotion is not a reward for what an individual did in the past, but a recognition of what he/she can do in the future.
I, too, have seen way too many people promoted who were not ready. That is not good for that person and it is not good for the unit he/she leads. That is not to say that a leader must be fully prepared for that position; you can really never be until you are in it. With the help and support of others and personal dedication to learn every facet of the position, a motivated person can succeed.
You make some very good points. Very well stated.
I totally agree with you. People should not be promoted who are not prepared to lead. That does not mean that people should not work towards getting promoted. I have stated in a great many promotion ceremonies that the promotion is not a reward for what an individual did in the past, but a recognition of what he/she can do in the future.
I, too, have seen way too many people promoted who were not ready. That is not good for that person and it is not good for the unit he/she leads. That is not to say that a leader must be fully prepared for that position; you can really never be until you are in it. With the help and support of others and personal dedication to learn every facet of the position, a motivated person can succeed.
(0)
(0)
COL Jean (John) F. B.
SGT David Schreiner
Certainly not a waste of my time to read your well thought out logic and opinion. I agree with most of what you say.
Specialists and Warrant Officer ranks were created for exactly what you stated and, if not for the growth of the civilian support of the military, those ranks could have easily become just as you describe.
You make a compelling argument and I clearly see your point. I still believe, however, that the military is unique and the current policy best serves it. While I certainly agree there are exceptions to the rule, having a stagnant enlisted force of "technicians", not "leaders", is detrimental to military readiness. I guess I'm just "old school" about that.
Certainly not a waste of my time to read your well thought out logic and opinion. I agree with most of what you say.
Specialists and Warrant Officer ranks were created for exactly what you stated and, if not for the growth of the civilian support of the military, those ranks could have easily become just as you describe.
You make a compelling argument and I clearly see your point. I still believe, however, that the military is unique and the current policy best serves it. While I certainly agree there are exceptions to the rule, having a stagnant enlisted force of "technicians", not "leaders", is detrimental to military readiness. I guess I'm just "old school" about that.
(0)
(0)
COL Jean (John) F. B.
SGT David Schreiner
I hear you and understand, however, I disagree. A soldier is a soldier. If he/she wants to be like a civilian, so be it. We already have a service in the service, so to speak, and they are called DA/DOD civilian personnel and contractors.
I hear you and understand, however, I disagree. A soldier is a soldier. If he/she wants to be like a civilian, so be it. We already have a service in the service, so to speak, and they are called DA/DOD civilian personnel and contractors.
(0)
(0)
4
4
0
If the person wants a job working for the Government, particularly in a support field as you describe, then he or she should leave the military and become a civil servant. Civil servants can work for many years, actually decades, at the same job never concerning themselves about promotion if they want. They get good pay and benefits, and guaranteed increases in pay for longevity. The Army and Air Force civilian employees I worked with were generally very good people who knew their jobs, did them well, had solid integrity, personal generosity, and sincerely cared about the military members and the country. There were exceptions, but they were a small percentage of the workforce. Good supervisors knew how to get rid of the folks who didn't our wouldn't do their job. (Yes, it is possible to fire a civil servant.) A good civilian or military supervisor will challenge good employees to grow in their career field, improve their skills and education, and encourage them to apply for positions in increased grade and responsibility. Ultimately it's up to the employees to pick up the challenge or not. If they don't, they can still count on the good pay, etc., mentioned above.
CSM Oldsen and others in this string addressed the need for leaders better than I can. It's the strongest case for up or out.
CSM Oldsen and others in this string addressed the need for leaders better than I can. It's the strongest case for up or out.
(4)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google