Process.

This is coolbert:

From a comment to the blog:

"I'm no Ike by any means, but is that really the way we should be promoting our generals? I'm sure stuff like this happens all the time in the corporate world and may even be appropriate there, but if we're talking about winning our wars...I don't know."

This particular comment with regard to the decision making process as followed by General Eisenhower is selecting his replacement - - as U.S. Army Chief of Staff.

First, in lieu of another method than the current selection process, for both officer and enlist ranks to be promoted to higher levels, I am not sure what else could work.

An impersonal method would seem to be fairest.

But obviously [?] an impersonal criteria cannot ALWAYS select the best. Ticket punching, going to the requisite schools, having served in certain positions, commanded at certain levels, having all the right paperwork with a sharp looking photo, is only ONE way to make selections.

Subjective criteria is just that, too difficult to measure. Elan', dash, whatever you want to call it, or being controversial is NOT something that would help the candidate for higher promotion and rank. The Japanese saying that, "protruding nails will be hammered" seems to apply here too!!

Secondly, in the past, no real criteria even existed!! Promotions to the higher ranks in the years PRIOR to World War Two [WW2], was STRICTLY by seniority. I cannot exactly remember, but it seems I read that Eisenhower spent something like sixteen years as a Major. His reputation as being the finest staff officer in the army was solidified from this experience. But the opportunities for promotion DID NOT exist under the seniority system, even for an obviously bright person such as Ike.

Thirdly, the entire process of impersonal/based upon files/standard criteria for promotion is only something that has been in place more or less since the end of WW2. Thirty five years is the magic number for retirement. That seniority system has been done away with totally. This is a good thing. Allow for the elder troops to be retired and younger men to take their place. Periodic replacement is a good thing of itself. This is institutionalized now.

If a better system can be found, put in place and use. But what would that system be? I cannot say!

[it may also be that it was Bradley, and not Eisenhower that could not make the decision as to who his successor would be. The chronology for Army CoS was Eisenhower, then Bradley, then Collins. I remember Collins as being the man who was chosen over Ridgeway. So I may be slightly off here.]

coolbert.