A major problem

[Administrator]

Majors — the Army’s future senior leaders — are exiting the service at increasing rates during a period of military growth. A recent article in The Washington Post indicated the Army is about 15 percent short of its goal of 15,700 majors. Lawrence Korb, former assistant secretary of defense and now a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, said, “Retention of battle-tested majors should be the Army’s highest personnel priority. These are the future Pattons, Powells and Petraeuses who will lead soldiers into combat over the next two decades.”

http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2008/12/3801581

[RNeave]

On the topic of retention of Army Majors, I can speak first-hand. I am an Army Major, currently a student at the Army Command and General Staff College (CGSC), and I came very close to leaving the Army in my 11th year of service, as a Major. Four years later, I’m tremendously glad I decided to stay in, and I ask for no bonus or reward package. My major motivator is ‘service to country’.

As a former Army Recruiting Company Commander, I learned a very simple strategy used while engaging prospective enlistment applicants. Recruiters are taught to employ the acronym ‘TEAMS’ (training, education, adventure, money / money for college, service to country), elements which signify the five major motivators for those who enlist. Once you identify an individual’s motivator(s), you know how to better structure your conversations to maintain interest. I can easily recognize the TEAMS strategy being applied to retain our officers. Some brief examples:

- Training: Increased opportunities to attend Army schools such as Ranger School for junior officers. While at CGSC, Majors can choose from a wide variety of elective courses offering functional skills training. Through other programs Majors can also cross-train in a new career functional area, such as public affairs, information operations, and many others.

- Education: Increased opportunities for graduate school for Captains. Majors have the option of pursuing a master’s degree while at CGSC, to include an opportunity for a fully-funded master’s in military art and science (MMAS).

- Adventure: Current overseas contingency operations provide ample “adventure”, thus I haven’t seen any initiatives to use adventure as a retention motivator for Majors, except for the opportunity to volunteer for transition team service. As a plus, Army Chief of Staff, GEN George Casey, has emphasized the importance of field grade transition team assignments by directing selection boards to consider positive professional credit for Majors and Lieutenant Colonels in staff and command positions respectively on transition teams. Formerly, assignments on transition teams were consuming valuable and limited time for officers to serve in key and developmental (KD) assignments, and battalion-level commands, and such officers were not receiving adequate positive credit for time served on the transition teams. This condition very likely caused a good number of officers to leave the Army. GEN Casey’s guidance serves as a remedy.

- Money / Money for College: Retention bonuses for Captains; fully-funded graduate school opportunities. However, no bonus offers for Majors, as mentioned in MAJ Caggins’ article.

- Service to Country: In recent years the Army has launched new initiatives such as the published Army Values, the Warrior Ethos, the Soldier’s Creed, and new slogans such as “An Army of One” and the new “Army Strong” slogan. These efforts are designed to make the members feel proud to be part of a values-based organization, with an ethos, a creed, and a catchy slogan that inspire a positive feeling and instill pride in serving.

- Perhaps an additional motivator is ‘benefits’. Applying more to service members with families and those with career retirement status, the Army’s benefits package is a significant motivator. Senior leaders have done well to protect our benefits.

In order to better retain officers, specifically Majors, the Army must continue to address the major motivators, and ask each officer, “why do you serve?”. In line with MAJ Caggins’ article, perhaps officer mentors could facilitate this process. As seen in Recruiting, simple conversation with the junior individual’s interests at heart can go a long way to making a Soldier, or keeping one.

MAJ Robert Neave
CGSC 09-01

[RNeave]

I have one caveat to my earlier post, with regards to monetary bonuses for retention of Army Majors. I stated that there are no bonuses for retention of Majors. However, the Army does offer the Career Status Bonus (CSB) / REDUX Retirement Plan, for all service members, regardless of rank, upon reaching their 15th year of active duty service who meet other qualifications.

Under CSB/REDUX, the member receives a $30,000 bonus (taxed) and agrees to serve on active duty through the 20th year. In return, the REDUX retirement plan reduces their future military retired pay multiplier until age 62, unless they serve 30 years on active duty, whereupon they will receive the same 75% multiplier as with the High-3 retirement plan. The REDUX retirement plan also provides a reduced annual retired pay cost-of-living adjustment (COLA).

For more information, see: http://www.dfas.mil/army2/bonuses/redux.html


MAJ Robert Neave
CGSC 09-01

[James Anderson]

As a two time Iraqi War veteran who has been on active duty status for 14+ years now (16+ years with enlisted reserve/NG time accounted for), I feel quite that a monetary incentive is greatly needed as an important priority to retain majors, myself included, in active duty service. However, that is only one initiative that should be provided, as further incentives along the lines of the Critical Retention Skills Retention Bonus options would go a long way to show a military/war veteran and his family that his time dedicated to serving his country unselfishly...and the family that has made that great commitment as well...has not gone unappreciated. I feel very strongly that further graduate academic incentives (to include field grade funding for law school, PhD programs, and programs designated to allow for university professorship), guaranteed station of choice, military school options, and the same benefits for the officers' family members is a necessary component of recognition for the sacrifices made.

One reason that I believe that the financial incentive would be beneficial to provide is the honest truth that you do lose quite a bit of salary in staying active duty army when compared to doing a similar job in the civilian sector. While this may not seem a big deal, I feel as though it is a very big deal, especially when the fact is considered that the majority of these civilian jobs can be done while still providing a service to country, similar job to the military one, and a sense of purpose. Honestly, the primary difference is that the majority of the time the civilian companies who offer such jobs also offer the promise of respect and dignity to their employees as well. One does not always get this feeling in the military realm.

Second, it would be a nice sign to portray to families that their difficult decisions and sacrifices shall not have gone in vain as well. The hard core truth of the matter is that family members all too often give up their dreams and ambitions and deal with incredible strains to the overall family situation...some strains that cannot be overcome. As a major coming up on 15 years of active duty service, I would certainly have peace of mind to know that I would be able to provide a college education for a high school daughter that I have only seen growing up through emails, phone calls and pictures. An incentive bonus or some type of dependent/child college fund would go a long way towards accomplishing that.

Finally, the article brings up a great point in the notion that, monetary benefits aside, it is a matter of principle that the majors' group has been asked to watch as other groups receive financial incentives and there is no such similar program in place for them. On top of that, we are asked to provide our 'own perspective and advice' to captains on why they should be treated more advantageously. To me, this concept simply is not fair and represents a major condescending tone, whether that is the actual intent or not. The message essentially seems to be, "Not only are we going to provide a better situation and scenario for company grade officers, but we are going to also ask you to accept this and parlay the message to them on why it is a good idea.". When this is coupled with the fact of giving up a better situation in the civilian sector for basically the same type of work function and load, as previously mentioned, it is no wonder that a group would see themselves as victims of a 'decked stacked against them' and only allow them to be put in that scenario for so long before acting on a better one. Thus, some type of incentive program would go a long way to curtail that situation from happening.

V/R Major James Anderson