Acting Chief of Military Personnel on Diversity, Inclusion, and Culture Change Short-Term Initiatives

[daftandbarmy]

I am fully committed to creating a workplace that is welcoming, inclusive, safe and respectful for every member of our team.

Right off the bat this sounds like any one of a thousand canned phrases we've all heard over and over and over. Just missing "robust" in there. Saying she's fully committed seems... I don't know. Was there an option to being partially committed? These messages have more impact if they are more personalized and not buzz phrases.

I always suggest adding 'or else' on the end of any bafflegab phrase like that and it will probably come off as a little more authentic.

 

[OceanBonfire]

Spotlight on culture change initiatives for military personnel

Here are some highlights of culture change initiatives from Chief of Military Personnel and Military Personnel Command that will have a positive impact on the lives of our military members and the overall DND workplace.

www.canada.ca

 

[Good2Golf]

Psychometric testing for GOFOs is a positive move. CAF Retention Strategy will be an interesting one to see.

 

[dimsum]

Psychometric testing for GOFOs is a positive move

I first read that as "psychiatric"

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Psychometric testing for GOFOs is a positive move. CAF Retention Strategy will be an interesting one to see.

Our current strategy of retaining the wrong people is not a good one…

 

[daftandbarmy]

Psychometric testing for GOFOs is a positive move. CAF Retention Strategy will be an interesting one to see.

We need to test people before they hit GOFO, though.

Most big firms I know do the testing as part of onboarding fairly junior managers. If they're not suitable, you can mag to grid them before they can do any real damage.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Psychometric testing for GOFOs is a positive move. CAF Retention Strategy will be an interesting one to see.

I'm more interested in how they are going chose who is retained than how they will. The last thing we need is more people hanging on because reasons.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

I'm more interested in how they are going chose who is retained than how they will. The last thing we need is more people hanging on because reasons.

That is kind of my question, too.

You are a Colonel/Capt(N) who is found not suitable by psychometric testing to be a GOFO…what then? Release?

Not that I have great deal of sympathy for our bloated senior officer corps, but if you want the good people to rise to the top and not be afraid to try for the brass ring, how do you encourage that?

 

[Halifax Tar]

That is kind of my question, too.

You are a Colonel/Capt(N) who is found not suitable by psychometric testing to be a GOFO…what then? Release?

Not that I have great deal of sympathy for our bloated senior officer corps, but if you want the good people to rise to the top and not be afraid to try for the brass ring, how do you encourage that?

I think we need to start doing this, as well in the NCM corps. Up or out.

 

[daftandbarmy]

That is kind of my question, too.

You are a Colonel/Capt(N) who is found not suitable by psychometric testing to be a GOFO…what then? Release?

Not that I have great deal of sympathy for our bloated senior officer corps, but if you want the good people to rise to the top and not be afraid to try for the brass ring, how do you encourage that?

Psychometrics are only one part of an overall HR strategy, of course.

It's dangerous to lean too heavily on a 'single source of truth' testing approach because humans are a little more complicated than that.

It's also expensive to manage people properly. Specialized testing is really expensive, and assumes that your organization believes that 'people are our most important asset'. This is where any military organization will fail as they treat people like ammo.

OK, a little less carefully, and with less respect in many cases, than ammo

 

[Ostrozac]

You are a Colonel/Capt(N) who is found not suitable by psychometric testing to be a GOFO…what then? Release?

Way more likely they will fill a chair in a HQ, ADM or DFL, where they will try to max out their pension, and work the bare minimum required.

In addition to the famed “Career Captain”, we currently have a cohort of “Career Majors” who are maxed out because they don’t speak any French and can’t be selected for JCSP. It looks like we want to add a group of ”Career Colonels” who we acknowledge as lacking character, and imply to be sexual deviants, but who we are happy to employ in staff and liaison functions where they will put forward minimum effort.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

Way more likely they will fill a chair in a HQ, ADM or DFL, where they will try to max out their pension, and work the bare minimum required.

In addition to the famed “Career Captain”, we currently have a cohort of “Career Majors” who are maxed out because they don’t speak any French and can’t be selected for JCSP. It looks like we want to add a group of ”Career Colonels” who we acknowledge as lacking character, and imply to be sexual deviants, but who we are happy to employ in staff and liaison functions where they will put forward minimum effort.

They already have an official position for them: Attaché

They can be deviants in Brazil

 

[Good2Golf]

Psychometrics are only one part of an overall HR strategy, of course.

It's dangerous to lean too heavily on a 'single source of truth' testing approach because humans are a little more complicated than that.

It's also expensive to manage people properly. Specialized testing is really expensive, and assumes that your organization believes that 'people are our most important asset'. This is where any military organization will fail as they treat people like ammo.

OK, a little less carefully, and with less respect in many cases, than ammo

Offset the cost of testing with the GOFO positions that will should be reduced.

Follow me for more HR advice.

 

[stoker dave]

I can assure you that in industry if you are a senior manager and not pulling your weight, it is out the door with you. In the last two years (or so) three vice-presidents that I know of have been let go from my organization (an organization of several thousand people bloated with vice-presidents). Vice presidents are not allowed to ride out their last years doing minimal effort.

As an aside, one of the reasons I left the Navy was because I was working as a Lt(N) in NDHQ for a complete slacker of a Navy Commander. This guy had no operational experience, no leadership, no people skills.... but he was regarded as 'a highly effective bureaucrat'. For some reason not obvious to anyone he was promoted from Cdr to Capt (N) while I was there. I thought 'that is what this organization values? If so, I don't want to be part of it'. That kind of environment is damaging in any number of ways.

 

[dimsum]

They already have an official position for them: Attaché

They can be deviants in Brazil

Don't threaten me with a good time.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

I can assure you that in industry if you are a senior manager and not pulling your weight, it is out the door with you. In the last two years (or so) three vice-presidents that I know of have been let go from my organization (an organization of several thousand people bloated with vice-presidents). Vice presidents are not allowed to ride out their last years doing minimal effort.

As an aside, one of the reasons I left the Navy was because I was working as a Lt(N) in NDHQ for a complete slacker of a Navy Commander. This guy had no operational experience, no leadership, no people skills.... but he was regarded as 'a highly effective bureaucrat'. For some reason not obvious to anyone he was promoted from Cdr to Capt (N) while I was there. I thought 'that is what this organization values? If so, I don't want to be part of it'. That kind of environment is damaging in any number of ways.

You and I sing off the same sheet of music it seems

 

[Navy_Pete]

I think we need to start doing this, as well in the NCM corps. Up or out.

But why? I someone likes what they are doing, is good at it, and opts out of a PER, are we going to turf them just because?

Higher ranks are a very different skill set which not everyone is suited for, and in a lot of cases, totally different work which not everyone is interested in. If someone likes turning a wrench and doesn't want to take on additional responsibilities, should we get rid of them?

The US 'up and out' model has a lot of drawbacks, but they have massive numbers and pretty minimal training for new people so can make it work. We have much smaller numbers with a lot more individual training, so it's a big difference.

Forcing people to move up the ranks doesn't help retention either.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Offset the cost of testing with the GOFO positions that will should be reduced.

Follow me for more HR advice.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

But why? I someone likes what they are doing, is good at it, and opts out of a PER, are we going to turf them just because?

Higher ranks are a very different skill set which not everyone is suited for, and in a lot of cases, totally different work which not everyone is interested in. If someone likes turning a wrench and doesn't want to take on additional responsibilities, should we get rid of them?

The US 'up and out' model has a lot of drawbacks, but they have massive numbers and pretty minimal training for new people so can make it work. We have much smaller numbers with a lot more individual training, so it's a big difference.

Forcing people to move up the ranks doesn't help retention either.

It's almost as if the CAF is a great example of a highly inflexible and bureaucratic organization that only sees things in black or white



WebMD actually tells me we have a serious mental illness

 

[Halifax Tar]

But why? I someone likes what they are doing, is good at it, and opts out of a PER, are we going to turf them just because?

Higher ranks are a very different skill set which not everyone is suited for, and in a lot of cases, totally different work which not everyone is interested in. If someone likes turning a wrench and doesn't want to take on additional responsibilities, should we get rid of them?

The US 'up and out' model has a lot of drawbacks, but they have massive numbers and pretty minimal training for new people so can make it work. We have much smaller numbers with a lot more individual training, so it's a big difference.

Forcing people to move up the ranks doesn't help retention either.

We love to talk about this mythical creature who loves their job is good at their job and who wants to stick around and who we want to stick around.

Very few of them have all of those checks in the box.

How long do we let people stay in and clog the system/positions ?

Do we want a bunch a middling people hanging about ?