Is there a brain drain in the military?

A wide-range of opinions exist on how terrible the military is at identifying, retaining, and promoting talent. The system, say many, is broken, and the best leave the military, meaning those mid-level and low-level performers remain and get promoted. SECDEF seems to agree, with his "Force of the Future" initiatives, and the Services seem to be on-board, as well. Three good articles here that offer a different point of view: that the system isn't broken.

I think the system for talent management in DoD is terrible, and should be reformed, starting with a full reform of DOPMA and removing HRC and especially branch managers from most, if not all, personnel decisions.

It's important to see it from both angles. If you ask current senior military leaders, it would be hard for them to say that there is a brain drain, else they would be conceding that the system that got them in place was a faulty system. If you ask people who got out, they are more apt to say that there is, as they self-selected to leave the system that frustrated them. So it's hard to get to the truth. However, a wise person told me a long time ago that there are two types of people in the military:

1) People that need the military
2) People that are needed by the military

I would say that the military's approach of one-size-fits-all, heavily time based promotion tracks, and rigid career progression, don't do a lot to retain type #2. That doesn't mean that type #2 doesn't continue to serve, but they often do so knowing that they sacrifice other potential elsewhere, and that's ok.

One indication that the military has a problem is the simple fact that the military historically hasn't tracked who was getting out. Were they the top performers? Poor performers? Did they have more education or less education? Why were they getting out in the first place? The very fact that the military isn't trying to learn from these things is indicative of a problem in my view. The US military is still the most powerful military in the world by a longshot, but it doesn't mean we can't be smarter about talent management.

I spoke with the HRC CG about this a few months ago, and discussed how RallyPoint might even be able to help. After our meeting, I shared with him the following article: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/us-military-tries-halt-brain-drain/413965/

Just my opinion, but talent mismanagement is a huge issue for the army. Other than personal pride and dedication to do your best their is no tangible benefit at all for being in the top 5th% compared to the 65th%. I say that because at 5% you won't get bz unless by luck and at 65% you are safe from things like OSBs and still have a decent chance for promotion. Fall below 65% and you have to start sweating the OSBs. Hover at 5%-10% you get nothing except leverage in negotiating assignments and the guy who is at 65% probably goes home to his wife earlier every day and enjoys a higher quality of life than you do, because you are married to a job that isn't going to differientiate your performance.

Talent management is absolutely killing the Army's retention of its top talent.

Brain drain?
Me no see brain drain.
Mongo eat now.

First, excellent articles.

One of the things that stood out for me was:

"Men and women, sometimes brilliant and talented ones, leave the military because it no longer conforms to their needs; drivers can indeed include frustration with assignments, job satisfaction, and educational opportunity. On the other hand, sometimes officers simply feel that they have done their time honorably and want to go do something else, or have read the tea leaves and determined that her or she will not be competitive for promotion. A career is not for everyone."

The military has a very regimented system (pun intended), which does not conform well to life in general. The longer we are in, the more complex our lives can potentially get and the harder it becomes to reconcile. Unfortunately, the vesting process for retirement (previous) is so coercive at a certain point there is a subset who is staying in not because they want to be there, but for strictly monetary reasoning.

The recent revamps to the retirement system should assist in that, however I'm not sure I can phrase this correctly. If I had my druthers, I would expand the "Service for Life" (Marine for Life, Soldier for Life, etc) concept and do a complete revamp of the Retirement, Reserve, and IRR system.

1) Anyone who wished to remain on IRR status could. This would replace our Selective Service Program.
2) The 20 year "vesting" would instead be incrementally vested (yearly), allowing Service Members to better choose when they could get out. No more "All or nothing." Retire at 8, 12, 23, or whatever, but be shifted to the IRR and subject to recall (see 1) OR shift to a Reserve status to increase Retirement pay later.
3) Greater ability to shift into Retirement, Reserve, or "Leave of Absence" Status (IRR) statuses. Yes, there would be complexities, however if someone wanted to pursue another "interest" for a few years (like Advanced Degrees) they could. By swapping statuses they would still be subject to recall if needed however, and the beauty is that it's a lot easier to deactivate someone than it is to just wait for someone to EAS/ETS.