Posted on Apr 12, 2016
Should Centralized promotion boards become Installation level promotion boards?
48.4K
33
19
8
8
0
What are your thoughts on Centralized promotion boards being moved to installation level with quotas per MOS, in-person interviews, and technical/tactical testing incorporated. I think this would remove a lot of bias and favoritism when selection at the Senior-level is made at the local and more scrutinized manner.
Promotion Board
Leadership
NCOs
Officers
Professional Development
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 5
4
4
0
Remove bias/favoritism? Why the lack of trust in centralized promotion boards.
(4)
(0)
SFC Randy Purham
SGM Matthew Quick, I wouldn't say its a trust issue. I think there could be better fidelity in the process. I, as well as you, I'm sure, have seen selections that were without a shadow of a doubt based on a name game and who-knew-who. Not that its a bad thing either, but the culminating result in a lot of those cases were unqualified leadership or inexperienced leadership being selected because they were part of the "circle". There are several in my field that were "groomed" to excel over others. Its a known thing, and makes some want to be part of this circle, so they go to no ends to make that happen. This could also alleviate some of the affirmative action scenarios as well in some MOS CMFs.
(0)
(0)
SGM Matthew Quick
SFC Randy Purham - What makes you think that this kind of behavior wouldn't occur, if not even more so, at the installation level?
(2)
(0)
SFC Randy Purham
SGM Matthew Quick - I think with the mixture of the panel by making it MOS immaterial it takes the preference and recognition out of the equation.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
I think that there is no perfect promotion system when indivuals with personal preconceived ideas are involved. many times there are repeat board members, low density MOS might not have any representation.
I kicked a Signal CSM without proper clearance off my secure site in Somalia. She sat on 3 SGM boards. I was a non selectee on all 3. I was the only 74Z SGM Academy Graduate.
I was a 74Z Information Systems Chief coming up,as a 74F Computer Programmer. Many times there is no one in my field and if there was it was probable from the feeder MOSs of computer or TCC operators much less technical fields.
It did suck to sit on the 2001 E-8 promotion list for 2 years and even get selected for the USASMA while waiting on the list. Then see people on the 2003 list get promoted before I did.
I kicked a Signal CSM without proper clearance off my secure site in Somalia. She sat on 3 SGM boards. I was a non selectee on all 3. I was the only 74Z SGM Academy Graduate.
I was a 74Z Information Systems Chief coming up,as a 74F Computer Programmer. Many times there is no one in my field and if there was it was probable from the feeder MOSs of computer or TCC operators much less technical fields.
It did suck to sit on the 2001 E-8 promotion list for 2 years and even get selected for the USASMA while waiting on the list. Then see people on the 2003 list get promoted before I did.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
I assume you are referring to SFC+ level promotion boards.
I present the following as a counter-argument. Think of everything that is wrong (and I'm not saying there is anything wrong with them, but adding this as a point for discussion) with SGT & SSG promotion boards at the Command & Installation level. All of that will be injected into SFC+ boards. Additionally, rather than having a singular Army Wide "Standard" with a yearly Memorandum stating what is being searched for, you will have massively different "Interpretations" of said Memorandum across the Army.
More does not equal better.
The USMC actually does "Centralized Promotion Boards" down to the SSgt Level annually. It works for us. The Army does it for SFC+. It works for you. The USAF/USN does Tech Testing. It works for them.
I present the following as a counter-argument. Think of everything that is wrong (and I'm not saying there is anything wrong with them, but adding this as a point for discussion) with SGT & SSG promotion boards at the Command & Installation level. All of that will be injected into SFC+ boards. Additionally, rather than having a singular Army Wide "Standard" with a yearly Memorandum stating what is being searched for, you will have massively different "Interpretations" of said Memorandum across the Army.
More does not equal better.
The USMC actually does "Centralized Promotion Boards" down to the SSgt Level annually. It works for us. The Army does it for SFC+. It works for you. The USAF/USN does Tech Testing. It works for them.
(1)
(0)
SGM (Join to see)
SFC Randy Purham - That would *maybe* work on a large post like Ft Bragg or Ft Hood, but smaller posts? I interact almost daily with CSMs, SGMs, and other command leadership around Ft Polk. How would that remove this alleged bias that you think exists? Most bases are fairly small. If you look at the composition of most DA level boards, I know one board member at most. On my E7 board, the only board member I knew was my Brigade Commander when I was a private. Guess what? I didn't meet him in person ever. One board member doesn't determine your promotion.
(2)
(0)
SFC Randy Purham
SGM (Join to see), the smaller posts can have the boards conducted at larger installations if that is an issue. That could be an advantage or a disadvantage I'd you work or see them daily. In a promotion potential capacity with testing and interviews it would be difficult to promote biased opinions of someone. A streamlined and straightforward process - uniformed across the branches wouldn't be difficult to implement.
(0)
(0)
Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS
SFC Randy Purham - "the smaller posts can have the boards conducted at larger installations if that is an issue. "
So centralize?
So centralize?
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google