Do you think that as you advance in rank and skill set should you remain proficient in the lower skill sets

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 25 Mar 2015 11:24:23 -0400

35F Discussion Forum https://isn.ikn.army.mil/GroupDetails/35FCTSSB2015
350F Discussion Forum https://isn.ikn.army.mil/GroupDetails/350FCTSSB2015
35F/350F Job Survey
https://ikn.army.mil/apps/TDIDDirect/AdHocSurvey?code=6DFQ

Invite others to respond by typing @name

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Mar 25 at 2015 11:34 AM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Wed, 25 Mar 2015 11:34:36 -0400

Yes & no.

As you move up the chain, there is going to be a degradation of some skills. It is the nature of the beast. However you should still be at the "generalist" level regardless.

In the Marines, we typically have "Feeder MOS"

As an example, the various 03xx (Infantry) feed to the 0369 (Infantry SNCO). Recently, they added the 0380 (Infantry Squad Leader AMOS) which would be an additional feeder between those.

For Intel Marines, I am an 0231. Our MGySgts are 0291 and are from ANY of the Intel fields 02xx.

So, an E9 cannot reasonably be expected to know what an E3 in a specialized field would, as he has never have been in that field. He would be expected to be "familiar" with it though. Using my example of the Squad Leader, he should be aware of the capabilities of each, familiar enough to utilize them, and possibly train down to that level.. but how far is debatable.

There is a certain point where they become too far removed from "current" as their role has shifted away from day to day operations to "strategic planning" that it doesn't make sense for them to retain everything. It's just a waste of a resource to have a E9 doing an E3-E6 billet.

Response by SFC Collin McMillion made Mar 25 at 2015 11:38 AM

SFC Collin McMillion — Wed, 25 Mar 2015 11:38:47 -0400

Another old saying, "never forget where you come from".

Response by SSG Willis Baker made Mar 31 at 2015 10:02 PM

SSG Willis Baker — Tue, 31 Mar 2015 22:02:25 -0400

How do you expect to train your troops if you don't stay proficient in all aspects of your job.
When I was a Platoon Sergeant in a Corps Radio Battalion, I had 26 31Cs & 31Ms. My MOSs at the time were 31C & 26Q. I had to go to school for Multichannel Communications just so I could keep up with my platoon.

Response by CW2 Joseph Evans made Mar 31 at 2015 10:30 PM

CW2 Joseph Evans — Tue, 31 Mar 2015 22:30:04 -0400

Each of the "lower" skill sets are building blocks for the "higher" skill sets. I've done the intelligence and you honestly can not be good at what is expected of you at higher levels if you can not master the starter set.
Skill level 1
Skill level 2
Skill level 3
Skill level 4
Collective skills
If I remember right, one of the tasks at each level is to be able to evaluate the effectiveness of juniors at each skill level. If you can't do a skill level 1 task because it is "beneath" you, you can't perform your skill level task of being able to evaluate the performance of a Soldier.

Part of me has a problem with this question because it stinks of "privilege". Not all situations, like not all Soldiers, are equal. There are times and assignments where you may not have a team of underlings available to perform all the tasks that you have "gotten away from". There are Soldiers, that regardless of the fact they got through AIT, will never learn to be good at their job. And Chelsea Manning's supervisor... Do I need to say more?