Accession Number : AD1026938


Title :   The Case for a Joint Evaluation


Descriptive Note : Journal Article


Corporate Author : Joint Staff J8 -Directorate for Force Structure, Resources, and Assessments Washington United States


Personal Author(s) : VornDick,Wilson T


Full Text : https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/1026938.pdf


Report Date : 01 Jan 2017


Pagination or Media Count : 7


Abstract : Active and Reserve Service members spend in excess of 3 million hours (roughly 342 years)annually preparing, rating, reviewing,and socializing military professional evaluations up and down the chain of command before submission to their respective Services.1 With almost 1.4million Active-duty and 800,000National Guard and Reserve personnel, the U.S. military stands as one of the largest assessment organizations in the world.2 Yet each Service has its own stove piped assessment system that essentially evaluates the same thing: identifying those most qualified for advancement and assignment to positions of increased responsibility. These systems appear to support this goal within their respective Services well enough, despite occasional evaluationoverhauls.3 Nevertheless, these disparate and divergent evaluation systems burden joint operations, distract from larger Department of Defense (DOD)personnel initiatives, degrade the joint forces ability to achieve national military objectives, and inefficiently expend limited resources. Furthermore, the highest military positions remain at the joint, interagency, and secretariat levels.


Descriptors :   personnel management , training , group processes (social psychology) , peer groups , military education , manpower , air force , marine corps


Subject Categories : Personnel Management and Labor Relations


Distribution Statement : APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE