arvizo wrote:IP seems to have a lot of prior Enlisted as well. And until recently, there was no way to directly commission as an IP, meaning most IPs have several years of service when they become IPs. So given these items, why would IP selection be 20% higher than IW? IP has had many years recently with 90% and above selection to LCDR.
Twidget wrote:We also have an incredibly "prior-heavy" designator, and one which is also filled with lateral transfers. I believe that this contributes to higher retention of JOs than many other designates. Arkad or IWOCM please correct me if my presumption is wrong. I also believe that this makes us more likely to experience bottlenecks during periods of economic uncertainty. I don't know the retention numbers, so this is pure speculation.
Information Warfare (IW) Community Considerations
Demonstrated expertise in one or more of the core missions of electronic warfare, computer network operations, and signals intelligence is the foundation of Navy Information Warfare. Information Warfare officers should have balanced professional experience, to include demonstrated leadership, Navy and Joint operational proficiency and qualifications, and technical expertise. Proven and sustained superior performance in documented positions of leadership and in difficult, challenging, and arduous operational assignments is the ultimate test of readiness for promotion.
Information Dominance Corps (IDC) Community Considerations
a. The IDC was established in 2009 in recognition of Information Dominance as a modern warfighting discipline. Comprising officers of the Oceanography (180X), Information Warfare (181X), Information Professional (182X), and Naval Intelligence (183X) communities and the Space Cadre, the IDC was created to more effectively and collaboratively lead and manage the cadre of officers, enlisted, and civilian professional who possess extensive skills in information-intensive specialties.
b. The Navy needs officers who are agile, flexible, and fully capable of leading across the range of functions associated with the IDC. This must be considered when evaluating officers within IDC communities. Evaluate the officer's potential to be an IDC leader, as a priority. Attributes and milestones within communities are secondary to this consideration. As such, board members should view an officer's performance in leadership assignments as an indicator of his or her ability to lead diverse organizations across the range of IDC missions and functions.
Pwlk wrote:IDC considerations outweigh specific community considerations? Interested in hearing a specific example of this.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest