The Marine Corps is considering non-cognitive testing to identify the best officers. Can this testing achieve its intended result?

2015-06-08T23:56:26-04:00

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/story/military/2015/06/08/marines-non-cognitive-testing-for-better-officers/28479045/

(* Because the subject is on USMC leadership and to seed the discussion with mature input, I tagged Field Grade and above Marine Officers who are in the top 5% in influence. The discussion is primarily intended for Marines but is open to anyone who potentially has something constructive to contribute.)

Marines look to non-cognitive testing to find better officers

Years ago, scientists proved that toddlers who could wait longer than their peers to eat a promised reward of marshmallows were more likely to grow

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Jun 9 at 2015 12:11 AM

2015-06-09T00:11:26-04:00

Sir,
I read the article earlier today, and the impression I got was an attempt to refine selection criteria more than anything. The current standard seems to be "academic performance" however the "drop rate" at entrance level is still fairly high (I want to say about 1/3).

The implication is that academic performance may not be indicative of strong leadership potential, whereas another metric may be better suited. This in turn could theoretically reduce overall training costs, and produce a stronger officer corps as well as find out the specific tests which are good indicators.

Per your survey options, I voted other, because I think all the options are correct to a degree. I think the current system is Objective, and works well, but we should always refine our processes. That's what makes us Marines, we're never satisfied with a "Not broke" answer. That takes us into the realm of protecting the system from Subjectivity (option 2), which is a definite concern, and how do we measure character (especially when the USMC prides itself on building it).

This is an interesting idea, worth exploring to an extent. How deeply I don't know, but I always like the concept of challenging "how things are currently done."

Edit: syntax

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 9 at 2015 12:27 AM

2015-06-09T00:27:44-04:00

Capt Jeff S.. As usual the wrong question is being asked . . . in essence how can we refine our testing to ensure selected candidates can pass OCS . . . when the real question is far more complex. The real question is what mix of the many staff and line officer disciplines will be important to maintaining force readiness during relative peace time . . . and how can we best prepare that relative peace time mix of leadership candidates to survive and excel in future conflicts. The question is not how to improve the academic pipeline . . . the question is really in essence how do we go about defining the kind of leaders we want these cadets to become over the course of their military career . . . during alternate cycles of relative peace time and conflict. Warmest Regards, Sandy

p.s. From my perspective, we spend way to much time ensuring our own and allied officer corps establish massive unwieldy bureaucratic procedural systems . . . and we select officers who buy into these massive institutionalized bureaucracies for the sake of self preservation, covering their asses, and failing to act in the best manner to do the right thing at the most effective time. Too many officers are completely hamstrung by bureaucracy . . . for example DUSTOFF birds that used to launch on 3 minute alert now wait for medically unacceptably long periods of time waiting for authorization and clearance from higher command.

Response by Capt Mark Strobl made Jun 9 at 2015 1:16 AM

2015-06-09T01:16:26-04:00

It is my opinion that standardized testing (elementary school-, high-school-level, ACT, SAT, etc.) will filter the specific and often INTENDED results. "What" is the test designed to expose? Across the branches, we need ALL types of leadership. We need people that can manage books, budgets, and assets. However, we also need folks that young PFC's and LCpl's will follow to hell, and back. I'm OK if such testing is used as an "indicator." But, not OK if it were to exclude some of those folks in the latter category. I'd say a better point to issue such testing would be prior to the transition from company- to field-grade.

Response by LCpl Mark Lefler made Jun 9 at 2015 1:21 AM

2015-06-09T01:21:10-04:00

I'm not really sure any form of testing is going to really cover all the facades of a person.

Response by CWO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 9 at 2015 1:59 AM

2015-06-09T01:59:44-04:00

Capt. Jeff Schwager,

I say maybe, but who knows right? What really makes a Marine Officer? Is it their Character? or their Rank?. How about their Education, IQ, or EQ. I believe that making of a Marine Officer come from their heart and mind and the ability to lead. Gentlemen and Ladies I retired from Our Marine Corps in 1994 after 21 plus years. I have had the honor to serve under six Commandant's of our Beloved Corps. I had learned a lot from my Senior Officers before me and after me. So with that in mind, if it will help our Officers in the Corps, then so be it. But most of all have that common esprit de corps and everything will work out fine. S/F, JK

Response by Cpl Jeff N. made Jun 9 at 2015 7:04 AM

2015-06-09T07:04:11-04:00

If this is the type of definition (below) we are using I would say proceed with caution.

Non-cognitive skills are any skills that are not cognitive, such as memory, attention, planning, language and thinking skills. Non-cognitive skills include emotional maturity, empathy, interpersonal skills and verbal and non-verbal communication. Non-cognitive skills influence the overall behavior of a person. For example, a nurse who is able to to easily comfort patients has non-cognitive skills.

The wash out rate is high because the schools are hard. I don't have any issue in looking at ways to better identify people that might do well through the school as they exist. If there comes a plan to make the schools easier, less stressful mentally and physically then I would not be good with it.

I would say proceed with caution. This sounds like some more mushy headed, feel goodism way to make us all feel better about things. It is hard to measure these skills but they are not bad skills to have. Some come with maturity and experience in life too. I would say my non-cognitive skills are far better now than they were at 20 years old.

I worked at OCS in 1982 (PLC Junior at Camp Upsher mostly) helping to train office candidates. It is an eye opener for many college students. I was only an H&S guy, demonstrated the courses for candidates, radio operator for exercises, humps etc. It is a tough course, many wash out.

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 9 at 2015 7:12 AM

2015-06-09T07:12:21-04:00

They need to look at the actual problem that they are describing. They say that the selection process used to select those who will attend OCS is the issue here: "The document explains that officials have found consistent attrition patterns with current recruiting methods, which focus on a prospective candidate's grades, test scores and physical fitness performance, as well as accomplishments that demonstrated qualities such as integrity and leadership. "

3 factors are quantitative and the other is qualitative. Armed with these facts, they can look at the reason why Marines are kicked out of OCS, provide a weight value to it and evaluate against the 4 recruiting factors. That gives you a starting point. Are the candidates not smart enough (grades), is our entrance test faulty (test scores), are we grading to hard in OCS (PF perf) or are our brother Marines recommending trash or are we expecting too much too early from these candidates (evaluations and recommendations).

Response by Lt Col Timothy Parker, DBA made Jun 9 at 2015 9:47 AM

2015-06-09T09:47:40-04:00

Interesting article. The academic literature on leadership describes being "smart" in several ways. Cognitive intelligence (traditionally the school work) is only one kind. As it turns out, Emotional/social intelligence is a better predictor of successful leadership that cognitive inteligence. Part of the reason for this is it takes someone to sense the emotional state of the followers and therefore use judgement to apply the right leadership approach to achieve the goals.

One of the leadership approaches is the command and control style - used a lot in combat as it should be. But, even Marines are not always in combat. Therefore, the judgement is used. Just my humble opinion.

Response by SPC David S. made Jun 9 at 2015 3:42 PM

2015-06-09T15:42:06-04:00

I see this as an approach in augmenting predictive indicators in the selections process. As this helps refine the selection process it seems warranted. However as there are many contributing factors not so easily quantified such as charisma I think there is still the need for discourse in determining the best qualified candidates. Also I think there is a big difference in how one performs on a "marshmallow test" and how one performs under fire thus before I could sign off on this I would need to see the math behind any such regression analysis that determines the goodness of fit for intrinsic character traits such as integrity, courage, or loyalty with any probability. Also as their are many variables in ones career how is the performance of selected individuals measured against the selection criteria. With all the nuances it seems to me like you could end up comparing apples to oranges in measuring the results of individuals careers. This approach could also be over complicating the process - just look at Lee and Grant and at who won the war. I also think this approach also has concerns as to pain points this method is trying to address and how it might conflict with the Marines end game of winning wars. While I think good officers win wars the consideration of how this process could negatively impact such ideas needs to be evaluated. Maybe this approach will produce an inflexible and to regimental officer corps - who knows. I think there is also the war factor - maybe due to the nature of war good officers do bad things to either protect their troops or complete the mission thus redefining who they are. Not saying its good or bad just questions in measuring non-cognitive skills with relation to a very complex multiple regression. The guy or gal that can answer all of this in a 100 question "test" - genius.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Jun 9 at 2015 6:12 PM

2015-06-09T18:12:55-04:00

We will go to gunnery as soon as the laser gun is invented.

Response by CMDCM Gene Treants made Jun 10 at 2015 3:46 PM

2015-06-10T15:46:13-04:00

Sometimes testing is not going to cut out all you want to eliminate. I understand the desire to have less "waste" in any school, it is expensive and we only want success, but...

One idea played with in the Marines was all Marine Officers needed to have prior Enlisted Service before OCS. Maybe that would be even better than Cogitative Testing. Keep recruiting potential Officers, BUT require them to go through Marine Corps Boot Camp, and spend a set period of time as an Enlisted Marine prior to attending OCS. Recommendations from their Enlisted AND Officer Chain of Command prior to attending OCS. (This is not for Academy Graduates, OCS ONLY.)

Response by Sgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 10 at 2015 6:09 PM

2015-06-10T18:09:00-04:00

Yes, adopting a data-mining approach to screening for recruitment to any job can maximize our training efficiency. There may be many indicators of future success that we have not yet identified, and once we do, we can theoretically eliminate attrition from formal schools while raising training standards. Although it may be counter-intuitive for some, applying this concept to enlisted basic training first would help to develop meaningful results for use in other areas due to large population cross section.