Commanders are dropping like flies this year

[Prosuper]

1 hour ago, M2 said:

Some in the Army are starting to get it!

More than Half of Senior Army Officers Are Turning Down Command Consideration

U.S. Army Col. Christopher J. Kirkpatrick receives the Joint Multinational Readiness Center colors from Brig. Gen. Steven P. Carpenter during a Change of Command Ceremony near Hohenfels, Germany, Aug. 16, 2024. (Staff Sgt. Dana Clarke/U.S. Army photo)
 

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.

The rank of lieutenant colonel carries unique prestige, offering officers the chance to command units of roughly 1,000 troops and to play pivotal roles in Pentagon plans for preparing forces for war. The position sits at the intersection of the Defense Department's big picture and the daily life of rank-and-file troops.

But while a command position is extremely high-profile, it also comes with endless work hours.

Instead, some officers are drawn to staff positions -- less-visible, lower-pressure roles that promise stability for the same pay. Those jobs lack the excitement of leading troops but offer something many midcareer officers might crave: a break from the relentless grind of command.

In other cases, lieutenant colonels are reaching the retirement mark of 20 years and have to decide whether they're going to seek the rank of general or retire.

However, it was unclear what drove the recent spike in senior officers walking away from potential command opportunities.

The command selection process itself has recently become mired in scandal.

Gen. Charles Hamilton, the former head of Army Materiel Command, was fired this week after he inappropriately intervened in the BCAP evaluation process for a subordinate who had been deemed unfit for command and ranked among the lowest-performing candidates in her cohort.

Against Army policy, Hamilton arranged an unheard-of second evaluation, which the officer also failed. Nevertheless, she was included on a list of candidates approved for command -- an action ultimately signed off on by Army Chief of Staff Gen. Randy George. Following investigative reporting by Military.com in March, the officer was immediately removed from the command list, and Hamilton was just relieved of his duties and fired.

Reactions within the Army are divided over whether the credibility of the BCAP has been undermined by the recent controversy.

Critics interviewed by Military.com, including some general officers, argue that the incident reveals systemic vulnerabilities in BCAP, with one senior official describing it as susceptible to favoritism. They contend that the subsequent accountability -- highlighted by Hamilton's firing after media reports brought the issue to light -- occurred only due to external pressure.

Others, however, point to Army Secretary Christine Wormuth's swift and decisive response as evidence that BCAP's integrity remains intact. By addressing the scandal quickly and removing the officer from the command list, they argue, the service demonstrated its commitment to maintaining a fair and rigorous selection process.

Beyond the controversy, deeper structural challenges may be at play.

Separate internal Army reports cite work-life balance concerns and scheduling conflicts as significant factors influencing career decisions at the lieutenant colonel and sergeant first class ranks. At those midcareer stages, troops often face the dual pressures of heightened professional responsibilities and the demands of raising families.

As soldiers rise in the ranks, so do concerns over their spouses' careers, an issue that peaks at lieutenant colonel. Families have long raised concerns that the constant pressures of military life, including unpredictable schedules, long-term missions and the generally rural locations of many installations, make it difficult for spouses to build their careers.

Access to child care has also emerged as a pressing issue, with military-run facilities facing space shortages and civilian day care costs soaring. Those logistical hurdles further complicate the decision-making calculus for officers weighing the rigors of command against the relative stability of staff roles.

 

Lets see here, having a staff position at the Pentagon or HHQ were the wife has powerhouse job inside DC or move your family to Ft Hood dealing with your female troops who under the constant threat of sexual assault or murder. My complements to the O5's who take this thankless job.   

[hindsight2020]

no buck, no buck rogers. In fairness, they probably know no amount of differential pay for battallion command would make a dent in the calculus for the individuals in question. Reference: pilots and the airlines et al.

Hell forget staff, some of us ARC B-teamers are happy doing O-3 work as O-5s to 20+. But the system has never respected nor rewarded technicians. As far as I'm concerened, we're even. I'm too old to GAF about what I can't change anymore. Take care of número uno and I don't mean flight lead. Sounds like more than 50% of these folks are doing just that.

Lastly, I don't know if it's the writing style, or the audience they think they're trying to reach, but the naiveté of the way these articles read as written is perplexing, as if they legit discovered the nature of this dynamic yesterday. No way Pentagon management is thaaaaat tone deaf to not know this. They are the echelon we expect to forumulate strategic war policy against a peer enemy, and you're telling me they're puzzled about some low-level subordinate manning, basic as hell behavioral economics retention calculus? Jaysus.

 

Edited Monday at 09:00 PM by hindsight2020