'New Model Army'? The case for direct entry at SO1 level...

Right, would it be fair to say as I suspected then? Providing that ownership is something that organisations public/private big and small struggle with in my experience but then again it's not something everyone strives for let alone is frustrated for not having.

The observation I'd make about your other comment about founder entrepreneurs is, that challenge on both sides is one that's worth trying to stomach for the greater good (the greater gooooood :), but the characters required to really make it work (and I think it's a range of very open minded yet perseverant people) must be incredibly few. You could be as game as you like but for the ploders why would they need to engage, what's in it for them? I don't know the answer.

I do find the whole thing fascinating and I think the public sector is full of incredible opportunity, if you could couple this with a more agile way of working that can deliver a bite sized chunk of work in the short term then you might get some good things done.

I dunno.


Public sector delivers really good things.

Here’s one I was involved with:


Introducing the Facility


Veolia did jack shit frankly except supply the money they grabbed.

It was a good project though, happy people pleased to be there.
 
I dunno.


Public sector delivers really good things.

Here’s one I was involved with:


Introducing the Facility


Veolia did jack shit frankly except supply the money they grabbed.

It was a good project though, happy people pleased to be there.
The point I was making about more agile ways of working was having people stick around long enough that the grownups who are invested in them haven't moved on before they are able to complete major deliverables.

I agree, public sector does some amazing things (and things that the private sector just doesn't do, although usually there are large private sector firms involved) but a recurring theme is people sticking with a programme long enough to see it through *and* for delivery not to be tied up for years before useful output is seen.

This comes back to the thread topic which is, if you want to consider DE SO1 entry paths then the culture needs to enable them to deliver in an up-tempo way or otherwise, *if* you mange to attract the rock star specialists you want, you won't keep them.

The issue isn't the entry path, it's tackling elements within the organisational culture which are deficient*


*Not knocking the army here, every organisation has cultural issues which hold it back.
 
I'm being thick then, how is that different to FTRS? I thought that's what FTRS meant. ooohhhhh, unless, I see, might be part time, or some sort of thing which means they don't qualify for the benefits or, I'm just guessing now. :D
In short, there are 3 flavours of FTRS - full commitment, limited commitment and home commitment. TACOS and X factor are slightly different. The simple version: Left of arc - HC means a fixed job description and place of work, short of WW3, that's your contractual commitment. Right of arc - FC comes with a job description and a place of work but the Army reserves the right to redeploy you, send you on ops etc. Most 'admin' type FTRS roles are HC.
 

Caecilius

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
In short, there are 3 flavours of FTRS - full commitment, limited commitment and home commitment. TACOS and X factor are slightly different. The simple version: Left of arc - HC means a fixed job description and place of work, short of WW3, that's your contractual commitment. Right of arc - FC comes with a job description and a place of work but the Army reserves the right to redeploy you, send you on ops etc. Most 'admin' type FTRS roles are HC.
I think HC gives you either limited X factor or none, while you get the full amount with FC. You also have no medical or dental entitlements if you're on HC. It's essentially civilian contractor T&C's.
 
The observation I'd make about your other comment about founder entrepreneurs is, that challenge on both sides is one that's worth trying to stomach for the greater good (the greater gooooood :), but the characters required to really make it work (and I think it's a range of very open minded yet perseverant people) must be incredibly few. You could be as game as you like but for the ploders why would they need to engage, what's in it for them? I don't know the answer.
IMHO many of the characteristics displayed by successful entrepreneurs are those identifed in potential officers, developed at RMAS and displayed by many junior officers.

But that dedication and singularity if purpose is rapidly eroded by the institutionalised culture of the field Army and destroyed by subsequent contact with the world of staff bureaucracy and procedurism.

I think with a few exceptions the Army manages to loose the brightest and best that is attracts far too early.
 
IMHO many of the characteristics displayed by successful entrepreneurs are those identifed in potential officers, developed at RMAS and displayed by many junior officers.

But that dedication and singularity if purpose is rapidly eroded by the institutionalised culture of the field Army and destroyed by subsequent contact with the world of staff bureaucracy and procedurism.

I think with a few exceptions the Army manages to loose the brightest and best that is attracts far too early.

One of the explicit assumptions behind the Short Service Commission used to be (maybe still is) that there were lots of talented and capable people with no interest in a regular commission who would be attracted by 3-8 years' commissioned service before they went off to a civilian career.
 

Caecilius

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
One of the explicit assumptions behind the Short Service Commission used to be (maybe still is) that there were lots of talented and capable people with no interest in a regular commission who would be attracted by 3-8 years' commissioned service before they went off to a civilian career.
That's pretty much still the case. It's a particular issue for Cav and Guards regiments who tend to attract a higher proportion of those people than other units.
 
Yes it is - the position is "fµck off, you're on your own" ;)
Not entirely. We do now qualify for certain types of support but the message has not quite got through to all medical types or the the CoC. Mind you, a former DO is mine claimed that if you got injured on duty you are not owed a duty of care....
 
Not entirely. We do now qualify for certain types of support but the message has not quite got through to all medical types or the the CoC. Mind you, a former DO is mine claimed that if you got injured on duty you are not owed a duty of care....
Ive seen both the good and the bad. Two weeks paid on an Army run recovery course for a broken ankle, against your unemployed so even though you were on Army time when you got injured and need surgery, we are not going to to pay you. Luckily he had some savings so didnt lose his house when he couldnt pay the mortgage!
 
One of the explicit assumptions behind the Short Service Commission used to be (maybe still is) that there were lots of talented and capable people with no interest in a regular commission who would be attracted by 3-8 years' commissioned service before they went off to a civilian career.
Exactly the talent pool I am pointing to. Done their apprenticeship, learned a whole heap of new stuff in business that would be very valuable.

A very long way from the FTRS cohort or, indeed, those who follow a career in the Reserves. The challenge is how to baseline their skill set and offer them a role at a rank very different from the one they left at.
 

jrwlynch

LE
Book Reviewer
A very long way from the FTRS cohort or, indeed, those who follow a career in the Reserves. The challenge is how to baseline their skill set and offer them a role at a rank very different from the one they left at.
What do you do about those who have done well for themselves in Civvystrasse but have also chipped in as reservists before this Brave New World dawned? Tell them "sorry, pal, you should have stayed out and waited to be bought back in?"

For myself... I'm comfortable where I am as a reservist SO3 who, because I came back late, is nearing fifty: I get to do interesting stuff, I'm appreciated because I'm an SME in some niche areas, and I mostly break even on it and earn in the respect of my peers what I don't get in cash. I'd be a little bit put out, though, if random strangers were lured into roles above me (in technical knowledge anyway) that I wasn't allowed to apply for because "you're already in and that's above your pay grade because you don't have the seniority, and they don't need seniority because they're coming in from outside".

Maybe the role will have responsibilities I don't want, maybe it'll require experience I don't have... or maybe I'd be a good fit for what they're looking for but I already signed up because I'm a Properly Good Chap. Am I in or out of contention?
 
What do you do about those who have done well for themselves in Civvystrasse but have also chipped in as reservists before this Brave New World dawned? Tell them "sorry, pal, you should have stayed out and waited to be bought back in?"

For myself... I'm comfortable where I am as a reservist SO3 who, because I came back late, is nearing fifty: I get to do interesting stuff, I'm appreciated because I'm an SME in some niche areas, and I mostly break even on it and earn in the respect of my peers what I don't get in cash. I'd be a little bit put out, though, if random strangers were lured into roles above me (in technical knowledge anyway) that I wasn't allowed to apply for because "you're already in and that's above your pay grade because you don't have the seniority, and they don't need seniority because they're coming in from outside".
Any direct entry or fast track scheme into (relatively) senior rank is going to disjoint the noses of those already in and seeking promotion. IMHO the only way around that is to allow open competition for posts via individual application.

Personally, I think open competition for jobs (and thus promotion) could seriously improve the quality of the senior cohort. But I think it’s a fantasy; the Army has no hire and fire system, officers don’t have the individual skill set of staff selection and there’s no effective HR set up to support executives through the process.

Like so many bright ideas that seem easy, the implementation of such a change is a massive undertaking. For which the senior leadership lacks the change management skills......
 
This. WWII set a precedent for any things. Then we went back to peacetime pomposity.
Because you really need an American film director commanding BAOR?

Twos-up on your reverse snobbery, btw.
 
During World War Two, 44 year old Hollywood director Frank Capra was commissioned directly into the US Army Signal Corps as a colonel to produce and direct training films for the forces and war information for our allies.
Slightly off topic

During WW2, director John Ford created his own unofficial naval reserve unit of film makers, awarding himself the rank of commander. It was unpolitic to put him in his place when the US War Office eventually recognised the unit.
He did use his 'rank' to derail films by other Hollywood directors in uniform, especially Frank Capra, using his pull at the war office.

John Ford gave John Wayne a hard time for not serving. Wayne stated in his defence that he was 44 when the war started and too old to fight. Ford countered that he himself had been 50 when he went in with the second wave at Omaha Beach.
 
We had a Hollywood actor as president. :-D

I hope you can see what I mean, though. There’s an awful lot ‘it’s always been done this way’ goes on which flies in the face of pragmatism.
Whereas we have had a number of PMs who have a hard time acting intelligently :D
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top