PDA

View Full Version : New education course to fill E-8 'knowledge gap'


BMT (RIP)
11-12-2014, 11:26
http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/careers/army/enlisted/2014/11/11/new-master-sergeant-course/18813527/

BMT

Pete
11-12-2014, 12:41
Well, there was the old First Sergeant Course at Ft Bliss.

That was a 2 month vacation for us SF guys.

Peregrino
11-12-2014, 21:01
I'm not impressed with the current SGM Academy. Why do these people think I'm supposed to be inspired to support this new self-licking ice cream cone?

miclo18d
11-13-2014, 06:02
"They go to SLC and then to the Sergeants Major Academy," Butts said. "There's this long gap between their education and trying to figure out what they need and why they need it."

I'll say this, that if you haven't learned to lead by the time you are an E-6, no 5 week "Warrior leader" course is going to help you! If you are an E-8 that can't lead.... God help us.

I did like the way SF handles their NCOES. Get the BS course done as quickly as you possibly can. Check that block and get back down range. I think my ANCOC was a little over a month.

MtnGoat
11-13-2014, 06:06
Is Battle Staff Course gone nowadays? Last I checked a Conventional Army E8 doesn't lead crap unless they fill a 1SG position. So why the push for this course? E8's are mainly Staff positions and Battle Staff taught them their needed skills.

The Reaper
11-13-2014, 08:30
SMA Chandler's legacy?

TR

PRB
11-13-2014, 13:51
'They've' been talking about this course to fill that supposed 'gap' for 20 years.
Always thought is was unnecessary.....kind of in the 'too late' ring.

Habu-MFFI 175
11-13-2014, 19:50
Always liked going back to Benning for some sort of NCO leadership programs. Man they were the best vacations, I mean working courses.....one arm curls.

33army
11-14-2014, 19:43
If you are an E-8 that can't lead.... God help us

I think you nailed it. Unfortunately, in the field I am in the process of leaving, there is an abundance of "untrained" E-8's. It is sad to see, especially knowing that when I came in I was deathly afraid of anyone with stripes and now I have to fight the urge to laugh at a "Senior" NCO that can't even manage a staff of 6, let alone a company.

NF_NYC
11-14-2014, 22:19
What problems did you guys have with bad E-8s? Was it an issue of bureaucracy, lack of accountability, being drunk with power, or simply not stepping in and leading?

33army
11-15-2014, 19:46
In my field it is a mix of all of it.

35NCO
11-15-2014, 23:06
I see it as the technical fields should bring back the tech SGT ranks for certain MOS's. I also see it as NCO is starting to mean something different than being a leader.

From my experience and perspective I see the Warrant officer corp in my field being less and less SME's and more a one size fits all, putting them in XO positions or having them fill any position that is broadly close to their MOS. They are no longer filling their true intended purpose.

The side for the tech fields is soldiers are expected to be technical experts in their fields but because of the nature of the MOS's they may stay strategic for their entire career. They may also never be in a position to lead soldiers or ever be around regular Army for that matter, ever. Most of their careers may be at 90% civilian population organizations. This causes a lot of problems for when the Army suddenly says when that soldier hits E7/ E8, "now is the time to be an NCO".

To further complicate matters, the Army is focusing more and more on sending the Tech MOS's through less and less to technical training and more NCOPD and Mandatory training. (Sexual harassment/EO/MRT..ext). So it goes both ways, the Army either invests in building NCO's or building MOS's. It depends on the luck of the career track for that soldier which one they really get. Not all soldiers will even be blessed to attend WLC/ALC/SLC, even though currently the system is suppose to make them go. This effects the promotion system and the quality of NCO's and MOS's. Again, tech MOS's may never get NCOER's that they were a Squad leader or PLT SGT, so they may or may not ever get promoted. If they get promoted without it, its bad, if they do not, its also bad for the Army.

My unit had some SGM's and CSM's come talk to us about the future of the Army recently and all they talked about was their concerns about garrison leadership. Then it boiled down to, all garrison leadership was to them, (The message I got) was about uniform corrections and constantly harassing soldiers about them. I fail to see how that is leadership. I understand that discipline is most certainly necessary, but feel that it gets lost in those with what seem like have a misunderstanding on how to mentor and lead. I often see NCO's obsessed with these things (AR 670-1), but never the same passion and obsession with leading, mentoring or their job.

IMO, in the Army tech fields, there are those that are SME's in their MOS, those that are Leaders, and those that are NCO's. NCO was meant to cover it all, but it no longer does. I see soldiers with one or two of those traits, but almost never all three. (Myself included here, which I still strive to understand.) But again, for certain MOS's, I think we are trying to force fit something that does not fit. Perhaps it once did, but be it either generational or just the evolution of military tactics and technologies, it no longer does. For example, does the Army really think the new Cyber War MOS's will one day be great NCO leaders? Those soldiers will not see the sun for 20 years let alone have time to be leaders. I think the tech fields should focus on being smart so that China and Russia stop accelerating past us in the tech fields. I think our new leadership strategy to apply it Army wide is dangerous.

However, to me personally what matters is:

Can you do your job?=Critical tool, Team and Mission
Can you work without supervision?=Trust
Can you work with supervision?=Perception and Rapport
Can you accurately fire your weapon?=Critical tool, Team, Mission, and Trust
Can you navigate?=Critical tool, Team, Mission, Safety, Trust
Can you think through complex problems under pressure?= Critical, Creative, Team, Mission.
Can you teach?=Critical Tool, Team, Mission and Rapport
Can you follow and can you lead?=Team and mission, no room for ego's and toxic leaders.

Maybe that all makes me a terrible NCO to the Army, but it is what matters to me if I had to be in combat with someone. Those are the areas that I think a leader should teach all their soldiers at the most basic level, but lets get there first, because I still do not see all these areas in myself, in all my soldiers or my leaders.

Not trying to upset the local NCO's and CSM's here, I may or may not be preaching to the choir. I do think there are positive things the Army is doing, but then in other aspects such as tech and intel (Others too?) we are are starting to fail by smothering it with this new sense of what the Army thinks leadership is.