View Full Version : Accusations against generals cast dark shadow over Army
BMT (RIP)
10-28-2012, 06:36
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/2012/10/27/a43bf66a-1f8e-11e2-ba31-3083ca97c314_story.html?wpisrc=nl_headlines
BMT
Basenshukai
10-28-2012, 09:28
"... The investigations have become an embarrassment for the Army, raising questions about how thoroughly the military has screened senior leaders before putting them in crucial assignments..."
I don't have a well-enough informed opinion regarding these specific cases. However, I do believe that our OER system needs to be dramatically revamped.
For one thing, how is it that a leader's performance and potential as such is gauged merely by those he DOES NOT lead - his superiors?
There needs to be a "360" evaluation where the subordinates' evaluation of their leader is heavily weighed in a balanced manner. Subordinates are the ones with the most significant contact with the "leader". When the boss is not looking (Rater / Senior Rater), it is the subordinates who are present when the leader succeeds or fails, is morally straight, or corrupt, etc.
I have seen leaders that are masters of showing the boss exactly what he/she wants to see, but fail miserably where performance is concerned. In my 14 years of service, I have seen a few LTCs (BN CDRs) with less knowledge of their own doctrine that captains under their command and with less common sense than an E-4.
Yet, when it was Powerpoint Time, they were masters at prioritizing that even over live-fire ranges so that a boss will get the right "message".
What I have found is that ultimately Soldiers do not like to fail. And, they will do their best to succeed in spite of a poor leader. Unfortunately, this propels that leader forward, in spite of his/her failures as such.
A "360" OER would eliminate that gap in the evaluation, in my humble opinion.
Dempsey, Odierno, Ward, the new CDR AFRICOM, that former COL who was relieved of command of the 173rd ABN BDE - if that's the 'cream of the crop' rising to the top, we've got issues.
As far as evaluations go, I used to tell my subordinates that if I couldn't sit down and write out an honest evaluation of their performance and potential without having them tell me what they'd done, I had not done my job and had no business rating them...and the same applied to them when evaluating their subordinates. I learned that one as a 2LT ODA CDR from our BN CDR who was a former SF NCO, a MOH recipient, and who practiced what he preached and expected nothing less of his subordinates.
Richard :munchin
"...There needs to be a "360" evaluation where the subordinates' evaluation of their leader is heavily weighed in a balanced manner. Subordinates are the ones with the most significant contact with the "leader". When the boss is not looking (Rater / Senior Rater), it is the subordinates who are present when the leader succeeds or fails, is morally straight, or corrupt, etc.
I have seen leaders that are masters of showing the boss exactly what he/she wants to see, but fail miserably where performance is concerned. In my 14 years of service, I have seen a few LTCs (BN CDRs) with less knowledge of their own doctrine that captains under their command and with less common sense than an E-4.
Yet, when it was Powerpoint Time, they were masters at prioritizing that even over live-fire ranges so that a boss will get the right "message".
What I have found is that ultimately Soldiers do not like to fail. And, they will do their best to succeed in spite of a poor leader. Unfortunately, this propels that leader forward, in spite of his/her failures as such.
A "360" OER would eliminate that gap in the evaluation, in my humble opinion.
The Army already has a website that the officers are using: Multi-source Assessment and Feedback (MSAF) 360
https://msaf.army.mil/LeadOn.aspx
I have already provided input/comments on one of the officers in my unit...at the moment, I believe that the officer being "360'd" is the only one that gets to see the input/feedback...I believe that there is a block on the new OER where the Rater indicates that the rated officer has either completed or initiated a 360 assessment at the time of the report...
My guess is that once they work the bugs out of the system, the MSAF 360 may begin to play a larger role in the evaluations system...