- Reaction score
- 3,730
- Points
- 1,140
The real problem is our insistence on moving 20% of the Force every year. We need to revise our HR model and develop career patterns that only invoke mobility when it is essential to either the military need or the professional development of the member. I would argue that you can create a useful DCO or OC in an infantry Battalion without them every having to leave (for example) Edmonton. A CO though needs exposure to the wider Army and CF to understand where his or her unit fits within the bigger picture.
Many of the HQ staff functions in various HQs do not require routine "refresh" in a field unit. We de facto already have permanent staff officers - why not codify that? Indeed, many pers in HQs are quite comfortable where they are....
Bottom line is that we need to be more selective. Those destined for bigger and better things need to be mobile in order to be exposed to a wider CF. Garden variety Capts and Majs do NOT need the same exposure, so why not leave them where they are?
Many of the HQ staff functions in various HQs do not require routine "refresh" in a field unit. We de facto already have permanent staff officers - why not codify that? Indeed, many pers in HQs are quite comfortable where they are....
Bottom line is that we need to be more selective. Those destined for bigger and better things need to be mobile in order to be exposed to a wider CF. Garden variety Capts and Majs do NOT need the same exposure, so why not leave them where they are?