What are your thoughts on the Army Promotion System?

2013-12-29T03:46:21-05:00

The
Promotion System. E5 and below promotions is fine the way it is. Promotion to E6,
the only change I would make is; make it a Brigade Level Board and Platoon
Sergeants are the Sponsors. Currently at
the BN and below level, there’s too much familiarity with the person, especially
if they are “board-babies”, they would be required to not only answer
questions, but in scenario driven questions based on the board topics (similar
to Audie Murphy boards). Then they would
provide their records file like for the E7 boards for review. This way they can
be head-on questioned about anything questionable in their files. E7 boards I
think should be done the same way, but at Installation level. Sure, the process may take a long time, but
the fix, give notice and break it down by alphabetical order or numbers
according to days to convene. This would force a “self-weed out” process,
whereas those know they may not be worthy of promotion at that time won’t
compete or even show-up. Screenings are done at the same time to reduce the
force (QSP/QMP). Those at outlier stations/deployed can stay under the current
system and have questionnaires or VTCs set-up to accommodate the questioning
process. 1SGs would be the Sponsors to these aspiring individuals seeking to
make E7. E8 and above, I would leave it
as it is. What are your thoughts on the promotion system?

Response by SGM Matthew Quick made Nov 22 at 2013 11:31 PM

2013-11-22T23:31:44-05:00

Disagree. If these NCOs didn't know anything about their MOS, how are they getting recommended to attend a promotion board (Command List Integration, aside) by their leadership?

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 22 at 2013 11:31 PM

2013-11-22T23:31:48-05:00

I do believe the promotion point system needs to be revised......again. Soldiers/NCOs being promoted that do not know what it is to be an NCO or Leader isn't the only issue pertaining to promotion. Individuals who are getting promoted for selfish reasons or those who aren't deserving of the promotion(s) are also other issues too.

There are great ideas we could adopt from other branches of the military in regards to advancement but I think better techniques on how to determine the right individuals to promote need to be implemented......and if they have, then they need to be enforced. What good is having a tool if you're not going to utilize it, right???

Response by SGM Matthew Quick made Nov 22 at 2013 11:34 PM

2013-11-22T23:34:04-05:00

Make numbers? Can you elaborate?

Response by SFC James Baber made Dec 13 at 2013 2:47 PM

2013-12-13T14:47:58-05:00

That is nothing new that has been going for generations my friend, do you know how many times they have changed the system in the last 15 years, it has been through so varied changes, I know so many people that have lost points on a regular basis based on the numerous changes. It is all about what looks good for a few years and then is tested to work out the bugs, which never happens in a timely manner, then they change it all over again. Good luck and stay safe.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 14 at 2013 7:23 AM

2013-12-14T07:23:46-05:00

I feel that the promotion points are geared too heavily towards APFT and Weapons Qualification. I know a Soldier who was promoted to SGT and the only points he basically had were these two and WLC.

Response by SFC Lamont Womack made Dec 14 at 2013 7:49 AM

2013-12-14T07:49:47-05:00

I think the promotion point system is terrible. I do not believe a Soldier should get extra promotion points for deployments or airborne unless they volunteered for it. The majority of Soldiers have no say in where they PCS. Just because one Soldier got orders to Bragg and now is airborne and deployed doesn't mean he or she is more high speed than a Soldier who got orders to Korea and didn't deploy. I would definitely get rid of those two areas for promotion points.

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 15 at 2013 12:31 AM

2013-12-15T00:31:53-05:00

The current points system is alright. It addresses physical fitness (as far as the APFT can), marksmanship, civilian education, military education (not just cheating on the ACCP anymore; ACCP, resident, and NCOES), awards, and deployment experience.
You can always argue that we give too much credence to fast running shooters with the possibility of 300/800 points for maxing both the APFT and BRM. However, that is also what I'd be impressed by of a high-speed Specialist who wants to lead his soon-to-be-former peers.

The point is that we need some matrix to judge a huge number of people by. The sheer amount of work that goes into attaining a high point score combines with the time required to get it all done to show me someone who is dedicated to doing things pretty awesomely.

It's "Whose Line Is It Anyway" in that the points don't actually matter. All the points are is the order in the order of merit list on who gets picked up when slots open up. This is why some people get picked up on the basis of maxing one or two categories while others have to be across the board awesome.

The real gripe is: We are promoting semi-competent suckers into position of authority because they're good at gaming a points system one way or the other. Here's the thing: It is the CoCs fault for recommending them for promotion in the first place. If you've got a brick who runs fast and shoots well, don't send them to the board. Recommend disapproval. Argue your point. This is about the Army's welfare and nothing else.

Response by SFC James Baber made Dec 29 at 2013 10:47 AM

2013-12-29T10:47:49-05:00

There have been so many repetitive changes in the last 2 decades, that any change or recommended changes would have to go through the pain phase, you know the phase where many people suffer through their scores and packets being redone and the loss of points.

The E7/E8 system is antiquated and could use some reform compared to all the changes that have occurred to the 5/6 ways. I think the overall system itself needs to be evaluated from an outside source for the fairness to all, because the senior looks are always within the same arena by members of the problem to begin with, it needs to have external oversight to help with revamping many issues of how the records are currently looked at for the 7/8/9 promotions to be considered unbiased and fair across the board, which it currently is not.

And I know that many E9s and E8s will chime in and say the system is not flawed, which is easy for the ones that have made it, but not viewed that why by the ones that have not and have seen the issues as a result of not making it.

Response by SGT George Mckinney made Mar 20 at 2014 1:35 AM

2014-03-20T01:35:34-04:00

I have found the point system can be good or bad. If it works equally for everyone it can be good but I've seen favoritism with it also due to personalities.

Response by SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 20 at 2014 1:50 AM

2014-03-20T01:50:55-04:00

My main gripes is that so much of it is out of your control. Sometimes it is hard to come across military schools. The only area left for me to improve personally is PT. It bothers me that it is so compartmentalized. I am maxed on correspondence courses, yet have precious few resident courses (I love how they always tell Soldiers they can't lose them for that period to go to a school, as they are too valuable) and haven't been to ALC yet (I had a class in APR, then was dropped and rescheduled for August). That is over 200 points I have no control over. Soldiers do not have control over awards, deployments, schooling and other areas that account for over half of the points. It is all luck and timing. The only areas in our control are the APFT, weapons qual, correspondence courses and civilian ed. I think completing these should be held higher. It shows initiative and drive.

Response by MSG Jose Colon made Apr 10 at 2014 10:05 PM

2014-04-10T22:05:02-04:00

That has always being a touchy subject for me.

I have seeing an NCO get all excellences in his NCOER and he couldn't get to work on time once in over a year.

There is nobody that good.

That being said, the NCOER, according to my humble opinion, is the reflection of the rater. It is their opinion, and as such, right or wrong should be respected.

It is the job of the Senior Rater to point out whether they agree or not and why.

What irks me is when you are told to write your own NCOER. Got it, some raters cannot write. But, with the exception of fixing obvious grammatical and orthographic mistakes, you cannot tell me what my opinion of my NCO's should be. You can show me possible evidence, but, unless the evidence is overwhelming, my NCOER's stand.

Regarding the board, after 27 years active, I have no clue what they are looking for, and it changes from board to board. It is hard to hit a moving target.

Response by CSM Michael J. Uhlig made Apr 10 at 2014 11:19 PM

2014-04-10T23:19:24-04:00

SFC Keith, timely post and you have some great points.

As far as the boards not selecting the right qualified people, it is my experience that a person with some bias makes this statement - personally I expected to see a sequence number by a few other NCOs on the list, bias exists in all of us however, I do believe we have a fair system and the right people are selected (only a few were privileged to be part of this board and saw all the records.)

As far as excellence bullets, you can't go wrong with using a bullet that is measurable against a standard (e.g. a justified excellence bullet: all 9 Soldiers in his squad scored a 300 on record APFT). Every senior enlisted leader has their own idea of the difference between a success and an excellence however, it is not that leader that will decide whether the NCO meets the cut for promotion, so my advice is to make it measurable against a standard and be as quantifiable as possible.

I often see Leadership bullets drifting into competence and training, I expect we will all see more of this in the future with the mandated SHARP bullets in the Leadership area soon. It's very important that we keep on top of all these changes - and understand we will have a new NCOER within the next 18 months, it's coming - trust me.

Civilian education continues to be very important and is a discriminator showing who continues to self-improve. Basically, it shows who is being stagnant and who continues to improve. With some of our more technically skilled MOSs, there are technical certifications that can (and will) set our NCOs apart from one another. And finally, a huge discriminator to set yourself apart (and more competitive) than your peers is to take the challenge to attend and become a member of those clubs like the Sergeant Audie Murphy Club or Sergeant Morales Club. Special duty assignments (especially Drill Sergeant, recruiter and AIT Platoon Sergeant) helps as well.

I encourage you to get as many eyes on the report as possible, get it in front of the CSM before the rated NCO signs the report - constructive criticism is only valuable if you use it to make yourself and those around you better.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 10 at 2014 11:39 PM

2014-04-10T23:39:25-04:00

SFC McKinley,

I have had this discussion a couple of times and I don't know how to fix it. You have to think of looking at thousands and thousands of records trying to see who needs to get promoted.

The degree portion is one of those things that shows you are working to improve yourself so it can tip the scales if you are close with someone else.

I talked with HRC to ask about NCOERs and who validates what is good or bad not to mention who does the sanity check. The branch manager told me it was really the CSM/1SG to ensure that it was written correctly.

Finally the level of ratings. This one is very interesting. Over the last 11 years I have been in a Signal, Infantry, SF and Support battalions and have noticed some amazing differences. So in infantry and SF everyone is an all excellence 1/1 because you want them to get promoted. Many of the support units try to do their ratings like they are supposed to be: not everyone is all excellence and 1/1. Watching the MSG/SFC results boards that my old unit many were selected but now in a Signal Battalion, with many more eligible, none were selected for MSG and only one for SFC.

These are things I think about when I am trying to write an NCOER to get someone promoted.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 10 at 2014 11:47 PM

2014-04-10T23:47:39-04:00

It is important that a bullet be quantifiable (if possible). It is equally important for the bullet to be easily understandable by any MOS. This is particularly important to CMF's where the promotion board is staffed by CSM's and Officer's of more than one branch. For instance, MI, Signal, MP are sometimes on the same board. When "MOS" speak enters onto a rating it will not be clear to all of the board members what the bullet is trying to say. This is not good. Ensure the verbiage on an NCOER effectively communicates your accomplishments and potential in "Big Army" speak so any CSM from any branch will understand it.

In a board, the members have seconds to look at your packet. This means they are not looking for reasons "to" promote you, rather they are looking for reasons NOT to promote you. Anything that might give them the reason not to promote weakens your promotion packet greatly. (IE errors on the uniform/picture, errors on an ERB, language that does not make sense on the NCOER).

Response by SSgt Tim Ricci made Dec 11 at 2014 3:06 PM

2014-12-11T15:06:57-05:00

I liked the way the Army System worked when I was in, SQT, Recommended, Boarded, and wait to make cutting score. When I made Sgt, I only had to wait the Minimum time after making the Promotion Board (3 Months), I am sure many things have changed in the last 31 years. I also Like the Fact that if you was in an engineer unit, the leadership grew up as an Engineer or whatever MOS Specialty of your Unit. In the Marine Corps the First Sgts and Sergeants Major most normally come from the Infantry and sometimes end up in a Aviation Unit, although most of them learn to deal with the difference, sometimes it just dosen't work out the right way.

Response by SSG Roger Ayscue made May 29 at 2015 12:18 AM

2015-05-29T00:18:05-04:00

I feel that the DA centralized promotion board should be required to inform every NCO that did not get promoted, EXACTLY why they did not get promoted, and if anyone was selected for promotion that was actually lower scored than they were, but because of an EO/EEO "Goal"(Quota) was promoted ahead of them.

The DA centralized Board should be required to release to each and every NCO the board sheets that decided their promotion. CUT and DRIED....PERIOD. Total Transparency. Lots of you are going to disagree...Save your breath talking about the AAR from the board. That is NOT the same thing as telling SSG Smith that he did not get promoted because he did not have "X" in his record.

The Army is bog on Mentoring and Counseling....OK, so am I, but the Department of the Army should be held to the same standard...

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 15 at 2016 8:57 AM

2016-03-15T08:57:44-04:00

I'm curious, how would SGT Briggs fix it? What would you recommend over the current system? What requirements, per rank, do you believe warrant promotion?

Response by CSM Michael Poll made Mar 15 at 2016 8:58 AM

2016-03-15T08:58:55-04:00

You can take correspondence courses to up your Military education points

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Mar 15 at 2016 9:03 AM

2016-03-15T09:03:27-04:00

Which specific aspect are you referring to?

Response by SGT Forrest Stewart made Mar 15 at 2016 9:32 AM

2016-03-15T09:32:58-04:00

I agree. In the time I spent as a SPC 4 I watched other soldiers go from E-1 to E-6. I was a 62B at the time. I was told that my MOS was an over strength MOS and my points needed to be in outer space prior to being considered. I knew my job well and went on to be licensedyon every piece of equipment in the unit. It wasn't until after I went into the reserve system and changed my MOS to ammunition supply that I was finally promoted.

Response by SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 15 at 2016 9:37 AM

2016-03-15T09:37:45-04:00

Not at all,. I think it's great that a soldier who can recite the Soldiers Creed, and a bunch of other non MOS talented BS that has nothing to do with leadership ability Should get promoted. Because being able to regurgitate useless info is what leadership is all about.