Will We Ever Stop Bleeding Talent?
Will We Ever Stop Bleeding Talent? An interview with Tim Kane by Roxanne Bras at Defense Entrepreneurs Forum.
Despite advocating for reform, Tim Kane does not think it is likely, at least in the near future. For one, Kane was not exactly embraced by the bureaucracy he critiqued; he has not received any formal invitations from any of the military services to elaborate on his work. While Kane has little hope for large-scale reform, he is more optimistic when it comes to the possibility of incremental change, and predicts that the military’s retirement policy will be the first to reform. (The Military Retirement Modernization Committee has already analyzed proposals, such as shortening the minimum time requirement.)
While I am similarly skeptical of the likelihood of large-scale reform, two contemporary conditions, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and budgetary constraints, favor the reformists.
Overall a good article that is generally on target. Like most articles that identify what most would consider obvious problems with our personnel management (largely borrowed from the business world) system is that it is light on “feasible” recommendations for fixing it. It is a system influenced by multiple other systems in and outside of DOD, so change recommandations will face numerous points of opposition. That doesn’t mean it shouldn’t change, but if someone or a group is serious about fixing it, then it requires understanding it first and then coming up with feasible recommendations.
It needs to be pointed out that up to 30% of the officers not selected for the fast track are not selected for good reason, yet if you talk to them they’ll be the first to tell you that the military is bleeding talent because they didn’t get what they want. That is worth keeping in perspective. The problem does exist, it is real, but one needs to be able to delineate those who deservely didn’t get what they wanted and those that are exceptionally talented and should have been selected and weren’t.
This article was directed at our senior offficers, but bad processes and systems have a way of spreading. In Special Forces we significantly hurt our NCO Corp when SF NCOs were forced to punch tickets and Team Sergeants (always the core of SF) were limited to 2 years of ODA time as a Team Sergeant, then time to move onto punch tickets elsewhere, compared to Team Sergeants often having more than 5 years in that position. Not to be out done Special Forces Warrant Officers decided they needed a management system that paralleled the officer corps with the appropriate ticket punches, instead of allowing guys to pursue and stay in positions that they’re good in and enjoy (that often goes together), and most importantly positions where they can make significant contributions to national security.
SOCOM is trying to improve its personnel talent management, but it is largely controlled by the services (large bureaucracies), so it will be an uphill fight, but one well worth winning.