IW CDR/LCDR Milestone Billets

Re: IW CDR/LCDR Milestone Billets

Postby yoshi » Thu Sep 26, 2013 3:32 pm

Nope, not what I was saying in my previous post. Stganation simply refers to that point at which a sizeable number of officers in a particualr grade or grades lack upward mobility to reach the next grade. If we have an 05 or O6 who has never been an XO, CO, never been operational (just an example here), one could argue they are stagnant. Just because they are a CAPT doesn't mean they are aren't stagnant, if we view command/operational tours to be important for the health of our community (individual versus community). Stagnation referes to the point where there isn't much added value for the community in that officer's service beyond what the officer has ALREADY done. Put another way, if I take that same CAPT and look to detail him/her, is their experience and skill consistent with them being able to successfully fill any job? Does this mean an officer should go home if they are stagnant? No, that's not what I am saying and it is not they way we operate. Exeperience can be very helpful in shaping those to come behind. But, when we are in a situation where most of our officers are stangnant, it has a depressive effect on future generations of officers. Everyone eventually becomes stagnant at some point in their career, as they reach the ceiling of what their effort, their abilities, and limitations of the system they are in will allow. There isn't anyone I know of who remained in the Navy until they died of natural causes. Eveyone reaches a point where they have less to contribute than they did previously, that point at which their understanding is less topical and less timely, their influence (dervied through personality, respect, or experience) less accepted by others. For the O-3 or O-4 who is getting ready to negotiatie their 4th tour as a LT, he or she can sometimes feel that stagnation in grade. If a LT has finished a Master's, done PCS afloat or COMEVAL, staff somewhere, a cyber job... ...more as a LT than the folks above... ...what does the Navy need done next? Or - are they supposed to cool their heels? Stagnation is more prevalent in our wardroom than we would like to admit, I think, and I can see why. We mistakenly view a stagnant career as a career which is no longer relevant. There are a good number of reasons to maintain those folks who might never become CO of NIOC Central or might never be in a billet which is involved in determining the way forward for our community efforts. But, the main reason to keep them around is because they earned it. And, I wasn't attempting to infer anyone, acting in accordance with their personal desires, should leave before they want to, unless they are required to by statute. But, there is a downstream impact on others which must be considered and with which the OCM deals. Now on to value:

The value I spoke of was specifically related to the billets. At some point, given the additional amount of time in grade for most everyone, there may be a point where selection of the next billet is less crucial, less exciting than it should be (such as the above example). If a billet does little to spark excitement, provides little value for the individual (perhaps from a career perspective and I would describe this as one half of the extrinsic value), and does little for the Navy (any other officer could fill it and this is the other half of the extrinsic value), it is really easy for the person filling it to experience less job satisfaction (level of instrinsic "value"). As promo rates lag and timelines extend, the potential to view a next tour as less satisfaying increases, particualrly when factoring in the constraints surrounding the detailing process. When considering current and potential for job satisfaction, the best talent may decide to pursue satisfaction outside the service, feeling their talents could be more effectively used elsewhere (hard to argue given the military system). That said, the level of commitment and devotion to duty has been superb in our community (from what I have seen). However, I don't believe it can be relied upon in the future as we become more general in our approach to (now) four different community perspectives and less grounded (as a Corps) in specific skill sets, as we use billets to represent experience (sometime works, sometimes doesn't).

To answer your questions, there is value in keeping people at the top who won't go any further, and no, we aren't simply concerned with getting promoted. But, given the reality we are in, we must understand how to balance the appropriate mix of those who won't go any further with opportunity in lower ranks. And, i think it is healthy to discuss the issue as we approach and pass the statutory guidance for promotion flow points in forecasts. Also, while we aren't/shouldn't be concerned with simply getting promoted, I would seriously question someone who didn't have promotion as one of the their career goals/issues. In full disclosure, I will admit to a strong desire to be promoted. I don't think it makes me selfish or a bad person. Further, the "occassional" disconnect between performance and promotion board success should cause everyone to approach each board as if their career and relevance depended on it, because it really kind of does. The point behind being promoted isn't to reach the next rank. The point is to be able to access and exercise a greater level of influence in order to successfully address problems and obstalces. The way our structure works, we assign rank to responsibility. Generally speaking, the higher in rank you are, the more influence you will be able to wield. That is what makes certain experiences in grade so vitally important to the health of a communtiy. Certanily, we have a few who are all about taking care of themselves, but I think the vast majority are genuinely concentrating on their assigned tasks. It is only unfortunate our advancement system doesn't more throroughly review (and use as strong criteria) the achievements of the officers and what they have produced for the community and the Navy.
  • 0

yoshi
Experienced Member
 
Posts: 406
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 5:10 am
Reputation: 19

Re: IW CDR/LCDR Milestone Billets

Postby Sum1 » Sun Sep 29, 2013 1:15 am

TomahawkChop wrote:
Sum1 wrote:I couldn't find CTF74 CRC on the milestone list. Listed in another fashion? Or perhaps it's an admission that that particular billet isn't a traditional CRC tour and isn't given the equivalent credit?


Yup, it got yanked. I was going there, then had to change to another job.


All you had to do to fix that job and make it a relevant CRC gig was put someone in the job who had previous experience as a JO in that DIRSUP role. I passed a ton of constructive feedback to the N2 and CRC when I was riding, and saw only a few of the suggestions implemented. I'd love to know why it was pulled from the list, but I suppose that's for a different forum on a different network.

Bummer, I'll chalk that up as another job I potentially would have liked to do someday gone as an option.
  • 0

Sum1
Experienced Member
 
Posts: 925
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 1:43 am
Reputation: 15

Re: IW CDR/LCDR Milestone Billets

Postby TomahawkChop » Thu Oct 03, 2013 12:03 am

Sum1 wrote:
TomahawkChop wrote:
Sum1 wrote:I couldn't find CTF74 CRC on the milestone list. Listed in another fashion? Or perhaps it's an admission that that particular billet isn't a traditional CRC tour and isn't given the equivalent credit?


Yup, it got yanked. I was going there, then had to change to another job.


All you had to do to fix that job and make it a relevant CRC gig was put someone in the job who had previous experience as a JO in that DIRSUP role. I passed a ton of constructive feedback to the N2 and CRC when I was riding, and saw only a few of the suggestions implemented. I'd love to know why it was pulled from the list, but I suppose that's for a different forum on a different network.

Bummer, I'll chalk that up as another job I potentially would have liked to do someday gone as an option.


I WAS that JO you speak of...I'm coming off of a DIRSUP flying gig, and was excited to go there. When I asked the detailer what happened, the response was 1. The Navy (I'm assuming CTF-72) bought a LT billet, not a LCDR, and 2. The LCDR Milestones will be LCDR billets. For whatever reason, the workload/responsibility for that billet doesn't rise to what is expected for an O-4.

Assuming what was told to me is true, it makes sense. I don't think Tenth Fleet is in the business of trying to push the air community to do more. The reality is that the Navy sees the EP-3E going away, and we're shifting to more unmanned vehicles (and that debate is a totally different subject). In my current job, I've fought massive problems that I see in how little support we give to the COMINT side of EP-3E operations (not lack of DIRSUP support, but lack of billets at the squadron, wing, acquisition, and other EP-3E related commands), but the reality is mine and others arguments fall on deaf ears, or at least not on ears that can make decisions to change it. BUPERS is simply calling it for what it is. There is likely a lot of potential with that billet, given the right person and authority, but if we don't have the support from on top, putting a LCDR in there simply sets them up for failure. Better to send that person to another billet where they can make a bigger difference.
  • 0

TomahawkChop
Registered Member
 
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2011 7:29 pm
Location: Somewhere in the USA
Reputation: 1

Re: IW CDR/LCDR Milestone Billets

Postby COMEVIL » Thu Oct 03, 2013 12:50 am

TomahawkChop wrote:In my current job, I've fought massive problems that I see in how little support we give to the COMINT side of EP-3E operations (not lack of DIRSUP support, but lack of billets at the squadron, wing, acquisition, and other EP-3E related commands), but the reality is mine and others arguments fall on deaf ears, or at least not on ears that can make decisions to change it.


Sadly, it has been like this for years. I started flying in 1992 and have observed the same issues throughout my career. Yet this mission oftentimes contributes SO MUCH to the fight. Sad.
  • 0

User avatar
COMEVIL
Experienced Member
 
Posts: 832
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:54 am
Reputation: 36

Re: IW CDR/LCDR Milestone Billets

Postby VQ Bubba » Thu Oct 03, 2013 1:43 am

Deep sigh...
  • 0

User avatar
VQ Bubba
Experienced Member
 
Posts: 70
Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2008 5:52 pm
Location: Maryland
Reputation: 4

Re: IW CDR/LCDR Milestone Billets

Postby COMEVIL » Thu Oct 03, 2013 2:17 am

VQ Bubba wrote:Deep sigh...


What say you, VQ Bubba? This has NOTHING to do with VQ, NAVAIR, or the Aviation Community in general. They gladly filled the void we created. This is all on us...
  • 0

User avatar
COMEVIL
Experienced Member
 
Posts: 832
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:54 am
Reputation: 36

Re: IW CDR/LCDR Milestone Billets

Postby Sum1 » Thu Oct 03, 2013 3:14 am

TomahawkChop wrote:
I WAS that JO you speak of...I'm coming off of a DIRSUP flying gig, and was excited to go there. When I asked the detailer what happened, the response was 1. The Navy (I'm assuming CTF-72) bought a LT billet, not a LCDR, and 2. The LCDR Milestones will be LCDR billets. For whatever reason, the workload/responsibility for that billet doesn't rise to what is expected for an O-4.

Assuming what was told to me is true, it makes sense. I don't think Tenth Fleet is in the business of trying to push the air community to do more. The reality is that the Navy sees the EP-3E going away, and we're shifting to more unmanned vehicles (and that debate is a totally different subject). In my current job, I've fought massive problems that I see in how little support we give to the COMINT side of EP-3E operations (not lack of DIRSUP support, but lack of billets at the squadron, wing, acquisition, and other EP-3E related commands), but the reality is mine and others arguments fall on deaf ears, or at least not on ears that can make decisions to change it. BUPERS is simply calling it for what it is. There is likely a lot of potential with that billet, given the right person and authority, but if we don't have the support from on top, putting a LCDR in there simply sets them up for failure. Better to send that person to another billet where they can make a bigger difference.


I was speaking directly to the CTF 74 gig. As someone who's done every flavor of vessel EXCEPT air I can't comment much to CTF 72 or what the job would look like for someone there. As far as the 74 gig, though, if they bumped it down to a LT billet it's going to be setting that person up for some heated battles. Everyone else there pushing ops is O-4 or above.
  • 0

Sum1
Experienced Member
 
Posts: 925
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 1:43 am
Reputation: 15

Re: IW CDR/LCDR Milestone Billets

Postby VQ Bubba » Thu Oct 03, 2013 1:16 pm

COMEVIL wrote:
VQ Bubba wrote:Deep sigh...


What say you, VQ Bubba? This has NOTHING to do with VQ, NAVAIR, or the Aviation Community in general. They gladly filled the void we created. This is all on us...


Actually, I think it does. While there are party fouls galore on the IW score sheet for not supporting the aviation mission...the URL VQ side of the house never truly demanded an equal dance partner in maximizing a tremendous asset.

My real frustration lies in the undeniable fact that the Navy will allow this capability to lapse due to a combination of ignorance, neglect, and infatuation with unmanned platforms that remain unproven in their effectiveness, if not their efficiency.

We have never really found a good way to quantify the value of what we provide (irrespective of platform)...and I fear that "on-station time" and "orbits" will become the new "number of reports issued" as a metric that supports our MOP but not our MOE.

Again, from a platform agnostic perspective, we need to take a hard look at the what value we are bringing to our supported customers in light of the cost...really look at the impact...and ask ourselves if we are doing what needs to be done, in the right way, with the right people...and can/should we continue to incur that cost.

Successful businesses (even militaries) rarely throw money into a program and never ask the hard questions about the variance between expected and actual ROI.

Woo...that was cathartic. End venting...

More importantly...Go Navy, Beat Air Force!
  • 0

User avatar
VQ Bubba
Experienced Member
 
Posts: 70
Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2008 5:52 pm
Location: Maryland
Reputation: 4

Re: IW CDR/LCDR Milestone Billets

Postby COMEVIL » Thu Oct 03, 2013 2:20 pm

VQ Bubba wrote:
COMEVIL wrote:
VQ Bubba wrote:Deep sigh...


What say you, VQ Bubba? This has NOTHING to do with VQ, NAVAIR, or the Aviation Community in general. They gladly filled the void we created. This is all on us...


Actually, I think it does. While there are party fouls galore on the IW score sheet for not supporting the aviation mission...the URL VQ side of the house never truly demanded an equal dance partner in maximizing a tremendous asset.

My real frustration lies in the undeniable fact that the Navy will allow this capability to lapse due to a combination of ignorance, neglect, and infatuation with unmanned platforms that remain unproven in their effectiveness, if not their efficiency.

We have never really found a good way to quantify the value of what we provide (irrespective of platform)...and I fear that "on-station time" and "orbits" will become the new "number of reports issued" as a metric that supports our MOP but not our MOE.

Again, from a platform agnostic perspective, we need to take a hard look at the what value we are bringing to our supported customers in light of the cost...really look at the impact...and ask ourselves if we are doing what needs to be done, in the right way, with the right people...and can/should we continue to incur that cost.

Successful businesses (even militaries) rarely throw money into a program and never ask the hard questions about the variance between expected and actual ROI.

Woo...that was cathartic. End venting...

More importantly...Go Navy, Beat Air Force!
'

Looks like we are in total agreement! Just like back in the days when we fleww together :D
  • 0

User avatar
COMEVIL
Experienced Member
 
Posts: 832
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:54 am
Reputation: 36

Re: IW CDR/LCDR Milestone Billets

Postby COMEVIL » Thu Oct 03, 2013 2:21 pm

Sum1 wrote:
TomahawkChop wrote:
I WAS that JO you speak of...I'm coming off of a DIRSUP flying gig, and was excited to go there. When I asked the detailer what happened, the response was 1. The Navy (I'm assuming CTF-72) bought a LT billet, not a LCDR, and 2. The LCDR Milestones will be LCDR billets. For whatever reason, the workload/responsibility for that billet doesn't rise to what is expected for an O-4.

Assuming what was told to me is true, it makes sense. I don't think Tenth Fleet is in the business of trying to push the air community to do more. The reality is that the Navy sees the EP-3E going away, and we're shifting to more unmanned vehicles (and that debate is a totally different subject). In my current job, I've fought massive problems that I see in how little support we give to the COMINT side of EP-3E operations (not lack of DIRSUP support, but lack of billets at the squadron, wing, acquisition, and other EP-3E related commands), but the reality is mine and others arguments fall on deaf ears, or at least not on ears that can make decisions to change it. BUPERS is simply calling it for what it is. There is likely a lot of potential with that billet, given the right person and authority, but if we don't have the support from on top, putting a LCDR in there simply sets them up for failure. Better to send that person to another billet where they can make a bigger difference.


I was speaking directly to the CTF 74 gig. As someone who's done every flavor of vessel EXCEPT air I can't comment much to CTF 72 or what the job would look like for someone there. As far as the 74 gig, though, if they bumped it down to a LT billet it's going to be setting that person up for some heated battles. Everyone else there pushing ops is O-4 or above.


Remember, the staff/command gets a say in what the billet is/should be. We can't just go shoving LCDR billets into LT slots. The gaining command needs to approve and ensure it is the right fit...
  • 0

User avatar
COMEVIL
Experienced Member
 
Posts: 832
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:54 am
Reputation: 36

PreviousNext

Return to Detailer/Community Management Corner

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest

cron