MANAGEMENT SELECTION PROCESS IN THE USA: TALENT-BASED REINVENTION

"The greatest virtue of the General is to know and predict the enemy's movements." Themistocles

          The Harvard Business Review (Nov-Dec 20) published an article by Colonel Everett Spain, Director of Leadership and Behavioral Sciences at West Point. In this article, the American Colonel analyzes the new process for selecting Unit Commanders of the US Army that began in 2019. Until then, the selection was made based on the individual documents of the candidate Commanders - if they met the job description -, a process called the "90-second process". The events that led to the decision to change were surveys of soldiers who responded - 20% - that they serve under a toxic Commander, while less than 50% of Majors responded that the best Officers are not promoted.

          The new process selects 450 Lieutenant Colonels who will command, train and develop 500 or more Officers and Privates in operations. The American Chief of General Staff placed great emphasis on the talent and inclinations of Officers and whether the Service can optimize its profits from the calls of its Executives. After all, as a father of three new Officers, he realized that the new generations (Millennials and Gen Zers) want more control over their careers. Then talent was defined as the set of knowledge, skills, behaviors and preferences (KSB-Ps). Then the Army Talent Management Team (ATMTF) was created, which is responsible for managing innovative ideas and initiatives, while he re-examined the Army Doctrine. This group is also responsible for the Commander selection process, which was named BCAP - Battalion Commander Assessment Program.

          The Evaluation Team, which receives instructions for the process from the ATMTF, consists of eight Evaluators: three Major Generals or Brigadiers, two Colonels, a psychologist, a Sergeant Major and the coordinator. Of the above, the first five have the right to vote, while the opinions of the others are taken into account. None of them should know the candidates they are examining. In addition, there is another psychologist who discusses with the Team member in order to form a more complete picture. In the rating, the younger Evaluators vote first so that they are not influenced by the ratings of the more senior ones. In addition, the opinions of peers and subordinates with whom the candidate has previously collaborated are taken into account.

As for the Evaluation process, it includes a four-day test: on the first three days, candidates were tested in a physical fitness test, issuing an order, questions to prove cognitive and strategic talents, and in a group obstacle test. On the fourth day, the 30-minute interview of the candidates takes place. Candidates answer the questions using the STAR method (Situation, Task, Action, Result) and everyone must answer within 30 seconds. The innovation in the process was the “blind spot interview”. Candidates took a position behind a black curtain so that the Evaluators could not see them and were influenced by their appearance, uniform insignia, and facial reactions. The accent of course “betrayed” the candidates, but it minimizes the factors of influence of the Group. Schematically, we can define the evaluation stages as follows:

The results of the Evaluation process are as follows:

• Cost $2.5 million.
• 34% of the selected Receivers would not have been selected based on the previous process.
• 25 candidates who would have been selected based on the previous process were not selected.
  • 96% of candidates were in favor of the process.
  • The new Owners in the future will become the new Evaluators.
  • The process can be extended to other levels of administration.  
    • The opinion of subordinates is taken into account.

Deputy (EM) Miltiadis B. Parlantzas, MSc, MSS (c)