More than Half of Senior Army Officers Are Turning Down Command Consideration (1 Viewer)

[Along Came Jones]

This does not bode well for the Army's future leadership.

More than half of the Army's senior officers are turning down opportunities to command, choosing instead the stability of staff roles over the high-stakes demands of leadership, or retiring, according to internal service data.

The Battalion Command Assessment Program, or BCAP, a cornerstone of the Army's effort to evaluate leadership readiness, assesses 800 to 1,000 lieutenant colonels annually through interviews, psychological tests and physical fitness evaluations.

Historically, 85% of those participants have been deemed fit for command. Yet this year, 54% of eligible officers voluntarily chose not to participate -- a significant uptick from the 40% average opt-out rate seen since 2019.

"The predominant reasons were personal and family circumstances, such as retirement eligibility and family stabilization," Maj. Heba Bullock, an Army spokesperson, told Military.com in a statement.

More than Half of Senior Army Officers Are Turning Down Command Consideration, Steve Beynon, Military.com, 12/13/2024 (Sign up required to read full story)

 

[Slartibartfast]

They don't want to be harassed by the Trump administration I suspect.

 

[Richard Long]

Military men and women who are looking for stability aren't really military men or women. People who want stability should be joining convents or becoming monks, not soldiers. I hear there are some nice places in Tibet for these people.

 

[RetiredUSN]

Military men and women who are looking for stability aren't really military men or women.

What are they then?

 

[Richard Long]

What are they then?

Vous, légionnaires, vous êtes soldats pour mourir, et je vous envoie où l'on meurt!

 

[BirdinHand]

Military men and women who are looking for stability aren't really military men or women. People who want stability should be joining convents or becoming monks, not soldiers. I hear there are some nice places in Tibet for these people.

So, then who would lead the military?

One doesn’t become a high ranking military official without a stable career in the military spanning years, if not decades.

 

[Mycroft]

This does not bode well for the Army's future leadership.

More than half of the Army's senior officers are turning down opportunities to command, choosing instead the stability of staff roles over the high-stakes demands of leadership, or retiring, according to internal service data.

The Battalion Command Assessment Program, or BCAP, a cornerstone of the Army's effort to evaluate leadership readiness, assesses 800 to 1,000 lieutenant colonels annually through interviews, psychological tests and physical fitness evaluations.

Historically, 85% of those participants have been deemed fit for command. Yet this year, 54% of eligible officers voluntarily chose not to participate -- a significant uptick from the 40% average opt-out rate seen since 2019.

"The predominant reasons were personal and family circumstances, such as retirement eligibility and family stabilization," Maj. Heba Bullock, an Army spokesperson, told Military.com in a statement.

More than Half of Senior Army Officers Are Turning Down Command Consideration, Steve Beynon, Military.com, 12/13/2024 (Sign up required to read full story)

I don't see a problem. The Army needs managers, too, and not all of those LTC's are cut out to be warriors. They can still be useful in "administrative" positions.

What that 54% is going to quickly find out is that there are just so many admin jobs. The more of them that opt out of advancement, the more of them are going to find their job prospects limited.

 

[Mycroft]

Vous, légionnaires, vous êtes soldats pour mourir, et je vous envoie où l'on meurt!

When military leaders get to the Brigade, and especially, the Batallion levels they aren't expected to die anymore.

 

[RF667799]

When military leaders get to the Brigade, and especially, the Batallion levels they aren't expected to die anymore.

They don't want to lead, and if forced they prefer to lead from the rear?

Discharge the dead weight. If leadership isn't a thing, we can hire secretaries and accountants.

 

[Mycroft]

They don't want to lead, and if forced they prefer to lead from the rear?

Discharge the dead weight. If leadership isn't a thing, we can hire secretaries and accountants.

Senior leadership ALWAYS leads from the rear. You don't ever see Colonels and Generals riding armored vehicles into battle. That's not their job.

 

[Rich2018]

This does not bode well for the Army's future leadership.

More than half of the Army's senior officers are turning down opportunities to command, choosing instead the stability of staff roles over the high-stakes demands of leadership, or retiring, according to internal service data.

The Battalion Command Assessment Program, or BCAP, a cornerstone of the Army's effort to evaluate leadership readiness, assesses 800 to 1,000 lieutenant colonels annually through interviews, psychological tests and physical fitness evaluations.

Historically, 85% of those participants have been deemed fit for command. Yet this year, 54% of eligible officers voluntarily chose not to participate -- a significant uptick from the 40% average opt-out rate seen since 2019.

"The predominant reasons were personal and family circumstances, such as retirement eligibility and family stabilization," Maj. Heba Bullock, an Army spokesperson, told Military.com in a statement.

More than Half of Senior Army Officers Are Turning Down Command Consideration, Steve Beynon, Military.com, 12/13/2024 (Sign up required to read full story)

What's the problem ?
Do we really want operational commanders who aren't totally committed to their jobs ?

 

[RF667799]

Senior leadership ALWAYS leads from the rear. You don't ever see Colonels and Generals riding armored vehicles into battle. That's not their job.

Oh come on. Quite a few of them have been killed in combat. No matter the degree of their exposure, they are definitely not supposed to fill the role of glorified file clerks.

And these duds are avoiding leadership in peacetime. Shit can them.

 

[Tangmo]

The armed forces promotion design is a pyramid with curved sides that narrow drastically from O-4 which is major or LtCmdr in the Navy.

Only 3% of 2nd LTs and Naval ensigns who are promoted to 1LT / LT jr grade make it to one star general or admiral. And that's one star, not three stars or four of 'em. Those multi star officers barely show up at the left of the decimal point. We need a magnifying glass to read that percentage.

Only 25% of Army majors get promoted to LtCol. That's 12% of the 2LTs who were promoted to 1LT. 50% of Army majors finish their time in service TIS then retire because it's when they can qualify for the 50% of pay as their retirement benefit (which was changed in 2017 to a less favorable "blended retirement" pay). If a major wants advancement to LTC he'd better have a master's degree from a service war college or school of one kind or another.

Half of Lt.Cols get promoted to colonel. This is 6% of our original 2LTs. Half of 'em retire after receiving their "social promotion" to colonel right before they retire so they can get increased retirement pay thank you for your service. By this time you're age 50 or thereabouts.

Half the colonels promoted meritoriously get to 1 star Brigadier General, which is 3% of our wide eyed group of 2LTs. The other half retire without a "social promotion" to BG. A colonel will need two war college masters degrees or a related civilian masters totaling two to be considered seriously for a star rank and grade. Although back when Jas. Mattis was a colonel he had no master's degree so he was told to get one for his first star which he did, at the National Defense University at Ft. McNair in DC: National Security and Strategic Studies. This also shows that the Army needs more majors, LTCols and colonels than it needs strategists.

Frankly speaking, with no wars going on it's not worth the headaches of commanding a battalion or a regiment of battalions that have idle troops except for an excess of training. The family stability is better but the work gets dull and routine -- and WTF for? And you gotta keep doing continuing ed on your own time as it were which always crimps family life.

Plus and anyway it's been said that anyone who stays in past 20 years works at half pay. That is, you're still in the Army when you could be retired at half pay plus a new full time civilian job. And after 20 in promotions are fewer available and much tougher to get cause the standards are higher and the competition nastier.

A lot of this varies according to force strength, the vital matter of timing, war or peace and so on. Even a given percentage can change, such as when one year only 36% of LTC's were promoted to colonel and then only 5 years later 91% were, but this is a radical fluctuation rather than reflective of trends over time. Indeed, each service has an age range of a time to be in a given rank. And now there's up or out.

 

[Oozlefinch]

More than half of the Army's senior officers are turning down opportunities to command, choosing instead the stability of staff roles over the high-stakes demands of leadership, or retiring, according to internal service data.

Not surprising at all.

One thing about command like that, it can be the end of your career if things go wrong. Quite often it can be that they get scapegoated, which can end their career. Also, there are simply a hell of a lot more positions for administrators than there are commanders. My last unit before I retired had one Colonel as the Commander, and three Colonels as administrators (along with Lieutenant Colonels and Majors). And as a Commander, at the end of their tour as such (typically three years), they are more likely to be relocated (where as the administration ones may stay in the same position for significantly longer periods of time).

Then the issue of where to go? Once they move out of the Admin duties, it can become significantly harder to move back into that. So when they finally finish their tour as Commander of XXX, they may get nothing other than a short term parking duty as their retirement is processed. One of my Commanders fell into that. Went from a Battalion Command as a LTC to an admin position where she got her silver chicken. Then moved to an Air Defense Command, then retired. I knew quite a few that would try to avoid command for that reason alone. As staff, they could look at a 40 year career, but as Command it might get cut at 25-30 years unless they are lucky enough to get stars.

It is not as some are trying to imply the "safety" or that they are "deadwood". Those staff officers deploy just as often as the Commanders do. If a Brigade goes to the Middle East to assume command of a Brigade, the staff goes as well as the Commander. And the highest ranking person killed in Afghanistan was a Major General that was the Deputy Commander of a Training Command. Very much a staff position, but he was still killed.

 

[Rich2018]

I don't think we're going to see a shortage of applicant for senior military jobs.

 

[Tangmo]

They don't want to be harassed by the Trump administration I suspect.

Your point is well taken against the Generalissimo Trump's contempt of a professional and non political armed force that isn't his own loyal legion of troops.

However, the Generalissimo -- which ridiculous rank is aka the G-MO -- Trump is focused against the generals and admirals with some spillover to colonels -- and Navy captains who are the equivalent of colonel. It's the officers with stars who are the "most senior" commanders in the armed forces and it is they who the G-MO Trump is at war against.

The majors, lieutenant colonels and colonels are senior officers who are called "field grade" officers. Field grade officers command battalions and regiments "in the field." In the Navy the "senior" grade officers are Lt.Cmdr, Commander, Captain. While these "senior" officers are the backbone of the officer corps, they are below Trump's malicious radar. It's the Big Guys with stars Trump is after.

The link in the OP refers to Army field grade officers only. Moreover, the article's focus is on the LTCol officers who are battalion commanders of infantry, armor, artillery forces which in the Army are called the three combat arms. It's the combat arms who engage the enemy directly. Everything else in the Army is in support of the three combat arms to include support battalions in the field too.

As a side note, the ranks of 2nd LT and 1st LT are unofficially probationary ranks. It's not a literal probation but it's just fact it takes time to create a newbie officer into an officer and the time as an LT is it. 75% of 2LT's are promoted to 1LT and 85% of 1LTs are promoted to Captain. These are known as company grade ranks which are like training wheels that after being an LT are removed when you make captain. There's an old saying about senior NCO's telling LTs "Don't talk to me until you make captain." While I never actually heard that it didn't change anything anyway. I was fortunate to have an SFC with clout who saved my ass every time.

 

[Tangmo]

They don't want to lead, and if forced they prefer to lead from the rear?

Discharge the dead weight. If leadership isn't a thing, we can hire secretaries and accountants.

LT.Col. Custer personally led five companies of one of his three battalions into the valley of death called Little Big Horn.

He should have been at the rear on high ground with a panoramic view of the battlefield instead of out front leading in the fighting.

Rather than command his regiment's three battalions from the rear high ground with fast horse messengers to his battalion commanders, he led the charge after having sent his three battalions on three separate missions on the vast field. Custer had no idea what was going on about his separated battalions while he himself was leading the five companies down there on the field.

Your post is so wrong you should be made a Russian general in Ukraine. Commanders command from the high ground at the rear where they can see everything. They do not lead the charge.


A decade ago Sandhurst Military Academy in the UK made a major adaptation to command in battle that has changed it beyond having a company commander command with his radio and not his carbine rifle. Sandhurst solved the problem of the company commander behind his company and commanding platoon leaders via radio while also taking radio contact by the battalion commander at the rear wanting to know WTF is going on. This bifurcation inhibited the company commander commanding his company in the battle. So Sandhurst came up with the superbly successful Battle Captain instead. The Battle Captain is detached from any unit. With his radio he positions himself to observe the battle right there in front of him. When the BN CO wants to know WTF is going on he cranks up the Battle Captain whose job it is to know and tell the BN CO. This is while the company commander is freed of the distraction of the BN CO getting him on the horn at the expense of the company commander who without a battle captain has to take time out from his command to fill in the CO. The Battle Captain is used throughout the US Army and in other NATO armies. The Battle Captain is one of these genius and practical ideas that everyone wonders why it took so long to come up with it.



Behind the massive computer screens that project the battlefield in real time is Capt. Jake Hartson. Hartson, one of the battle captains in the DTOC, is responsible for monitoring the battlefield and reporting the movements on the battlefield to the Chief of Operations (CHOPs) of the U.S. Army's Joint Multinational Readiness Center in Europe. Hartson started his military career at the age of 17 in ROTC and chose to serve on active duty as an Armor officer. Hartson has been a battle captain for five months. His previous positions were from a company level perspective and his battle captain responsibilities are at a brigade level, which means there are a far greater number of units to keep track of.

 

[RF667799]

LT.Col. Custer personally led five companies of one of his three battalions into the valley of death called Little Big Horn.

He should have been at the rear on high ground with a panoramic view of the battlefield instead of out front leading in the fighting.

Rather than command his regiment's three battalions from the rear high ground with fast horse messengers to his battalion commanders, he led the charge after having sent his three battalions on three separate missions on the vast field. Custer had no idea what was going on about his separated battalions while he himself was leading the five companies down there on the field.

Your post is so wrong you should be made a Russian general in Ukraine. Commanders command from the high ground at the rear where they can see everything. They do not lead the charge.


A decade ago Sandhurst Military Academy in the UK made a major adaptation to command in battle that has changed it beyond having a company commander command with his radio and not his carbine rifle. Sandhurst solved the problem of the company commander behind his company and commanding platoon leaders via radio while also taking radio contact by the battalion commander at the rear wanting to know WTF is going on. This bifurcation inhibited the company commander commanding his company in the battle. So Sandhurst came up with the superbly successful Battle Captain instead. The Battle Captain is detached from any unit. With his radio he positions himself to observe the battle right there in front of him. When the BN CO wants to know WTF is going on he cranks up the Battle Captain whose job it is to know and tell the BN CO. This is while the company commander is freed of the distraction of the BN CO getting him on the horn at the expense of the company commander who without a battle captain has to take time out from his command to fill in the CO. The Battle Captain is used throughout the US Army and in other NATO armies. The Battle Captain is one of these genius and practical ideas that everyone wonders why it took so long to come up with it.


View attachment 67547714
Behind the massive computer screens that project the battlefield in real time is Capt. Jake Hartson. Hartson, one of the battle captains in the DTOC, is responsible for monitoring the battlefield and reporting the movements on the battlefield to the Chief of Operations (CHOPs) of the U.S. Army's Joint Multinational Readiness Center in Europe. Hartson started his military career at the age of 17 in ROTC and chose to serve on active duty as an Armor officer. Hartson has been a battle captain for five months. His previous positions were from a company level perspective and his battle captain responsibilities are at a brigade level, which means there are a far greater number of units to keep track of.

And some tin soldiers command from a parade field while their peers die in disease infested jungles.

I'm not really interested in theories of troop leadership from someone who's entire experience consists of fancy marching.

 

[Tangmo]

And some tin soldiers command from a parade field while their peers die in disease infested jungles.

I'm not really interested in theories of troop leadership from someone who's entire experience consists of fancy marching.

People cuss theories when they have nothing of value to say. Cussing theories is the cheap thing to do.

I served in an Army Infantry Regiment.

The 2nd Battalion of the US 3rd Infantry Regiment fought in VN from 1966-1970. They called themselves the "Redcatchers." Is what they did.

In the war on terrorism companies of the regiment have been deployed to Iraq and to the Horn of Africa. The Old Guard was first to the Pentagon on 9/11.

Since 1784 the US 3rd Infantry Regiment has been a combat certified regiment. Presently the 3rd IR is a regiment of the US 5th Army in homeland defense. Indeed the active duty troops at the southern border since 2018 are troops from the 5th Army. Homeland Defense.

 

[RF667799]

People cuss theories when they have nothing of value to say. Cussing theories is the cheap thing to do.

I served in an Army Infantry Regiment.

The 2nd Battalion of the US 3rd Infantry Regiment fought in VN from 1966-1970. They called themselves the "Redcatchers." Is what they did.

In the war on terrorism companies of the regiment have been deployed to Iraq and to the Horn of Africa. The Old Guard was first to the Pentagon on 9/11.

Since 1784 the US 3rd Infantry Regiment has been a combat certified regiment. Presently the 3rd IR is a regiment of the US 5th Army in homeland defense. Indeed the active duty troops at the southern border since 2018 are troops from the 5th Army. Homeland Defense.

You should have left the bolded sentence as it was when you first wrote it: I served in an Army Infantry Regiment that sent troops to fight in Vietnam.

It's understandable why you didn't.

 

[Argent]

They don't want to have to give the order to fire on American citizens when President-elect Musk get pissed off about something.

 

[Fledermaus]

People cuss theories when they have nothing of value to say. Cussing theories is the cheap thing to do.

I served in an Army Infantry Regiment.

The 2nd Battalion of the US 3rd Infantry Regiment fought in VN from 1966-1970. They called themselves the "Redcatchers." Is what they did.

In the war on terrorism companies of the regiment have been deployed to Iraq and to the Horn of Africa. The Old Guard was first to the Pentagon on 9/11.

Since 1784 the US 3rd Infantry Regiment has been a combat certified regiment. Presently the 3rd IR is a regiment of the US 5th Army in homeland defense. Indeed the active duty troops at the southern border since 2018 are troops from the 5th Army. Homeland Defense.

Veterans tend to doubt that.

 

[Tangmo]

The Old Guard 3rd Infantry Regiment since 1784 belongs to the Constitution.

The regiment was formed from a company of Revolutionary War Volunteers from Pennsylvania and New Jersey.

It was the 1st Infantry Regiment until after the War of 1812 when three regiments were reformed into one regiment. Because the colonel of the 3rd regiment was senior the new regiment became the 3rd IR.

In Washington DC however the people know it as "America's Regiment."

The Constitution Regiment Since 1784. All the armed forces in fact.

In fact.

Twilight Tattoo | U.S. Army | 3rd Infantry Regiment | The Old Guard​

Ceremonial : The Army Story | Summerall Parade Field​

Fort Myer, Arlington, VA | Military District of Washington DC​

This is an edited 20 minute video of the one hour weekly Wednesday evening tattoo that includes the Army Drill Team. Major Harold Fuller who is The Old Guard Ceremonies Officer portrays Gen. George Washington on his black horse in the opening scene of The Old Guard replica Commander in Chief Guard which is Company A of 4th Battalion. Get out your dinner plate btw cause there's plenty of ham in this

 

[Tangmo]

They don't want to have to give the order to fire on American citizens when President-elect Musk get pissed off about something.

The armed forces are not going to shoot unarmed American citizens or residents. Americans who think otherwise have no clue of their armed forces.

 

[Rich2018]

They don't want to have to give the order to fire on American citizens when President-elect Musk get pissed off about something.

Or refuse said order.