Factors Affecting Selection for Promotion to Lieutenant Colonel (O5)

A. David Mangelsdorff, Ph.D., M.P.H.
U.S. Army-Baylor University Graduate Program in Health Care Administration

The U.S. military has made many contributions to leader development, management theory, and practice. Personnel training is a major function of the military. Since World War II, the armed services have emphasized educating future leaders and managers.¹ Career management and executive development of future military leaders and managers has been notable. ^2,3 Jacobs and Jaques review the history of executive leadership beginning with Mintzberg.^4,5 Formal military schooling and duty performance help officers to be competitive in career development. Formal schooling provides the technical knowledge to prepare officers for subsequent positions with increasing responsibilities and challenges. Nichols urged uniformed psychologists working in non-AMEDD agencies to be innovative and flexible, to develop and cultivate both generalist and technical skills (accomplished by military professional schooling and additional graduate education). ^6,7

What behaviors and competencies must be demonstrated by junior AMEDD officers to achieve successful careers as leaders and officers? The U.S. Army-Baylor University Graduate Program in Health Care Administration conducts an active executive skills research program documenting the competencies needed for career progression of federal health care executives.⁸Mangelsdorff and associates conducted a Delphi study of senior Army Medical Service Corps (MSC) officers for their vision for future MSC leaders.⁹ Army MSC officers must show integrity, courage, responsibility, and competence (among the behaviors and competencies assessed in the Army Officer Evaluation Report).

The size of the Army has been declining since 1990. Within the Army Medical Service Corps, the number of commissioned officers has decreased as well from 4978 (in 1990) to 3608 (in 2004). Field grade officers are encouraged to complete additional professional military and graduate education programs to develop their competencies. The U.S. Army-Baylor University Graduate Program in Health Care Administration has been educating military officers since 1951.¹⁰ The career advancement of Army MSC students who attended Army-Baylor can be examined. From 1951 to 2004, 74.5% of Army MSC officers (n=1341) reached O5 (or higher) and notably two graduates reached O7 and became corps chiefs. Three Nurse Corps Army-Baylor graduates have become corps chiefs too.

The present research examines some of the factors associated with selection for promotion to Lieutenant Colonel of Army MSC officers. Support from the Office of the Chief of the Medical Service Corps is appreciated for access to the annual directories of MSC officer personnel rosters (the “stud books”).

Method
Army MSC officers in the grade of Major (O4) listed in the 1993 Directory of MSC officers were tracked for their career development through the 2004 Directory. A predictive model was developed using information extracted from the MSC directories and the published O5 promotion selection lists. The criterion was selection and promotion to grade of Lieutenant Colonel (O5). Pinning on of O5 was confirmed using entries in the directories of MSC officers. Variables were coded as follows. For professional military education, the guidelines from DA PAM 640-1 section VI (military education) were employed: Senior Service College graduate (6), Command Staff College graduate (5), CAS3 graduate (4) CAS3/1 (3) Officer Advance course graduate (2), and Officer Basic course (1). For civilian education, the guidelines from DA PAM 640-1 section VI (civilian education) were employed: doctoral degree (5), professional degree (4), master’s degree (3), college degree (2), some college (1). The date of rank of O4 was used to determine year of eligibility. Date of rank of O5 was used to confirm promotion to LTC (yes=1, no=0). All officers eligible in 1993 (and later) were tracked to 2004 (n=1619). Descriptive statistics to summarize the demographics were calculated. Comparisons of the independent variables with the dependent variable (promotion) were made using Chi square. A predictive model using linear regression was developed to predict promotion to LTC (1=yes, 0=no). The independent variables included: sex [male (1) female (0)], professional military education, completion of Command and General Staff College (1=yes, 0=no), year eligible, civilian education, and whether student was ever enrolled in the Army-Baylor HCA program (1=yes, 0=no).

Results

Descriptive statistics were calculated for Army MSC officers eligible for promotion to O5 in 1993 to 2004. The sample of 1619 Army MSC officers had the following demographics: for gender, 82.3% male, 17.7% female. Date of rank (O4) started from June 1, 1987 to present. The majority completed Command and General Staff College (79.4%), the majority completed civilian education of a masters degree or greater (89.7%), and 16.2% were students in the Army-Baylor HCA program (of which 94.5% graduated).

Comparisons of the independent variables with the dependent variable (promotion) using Chi square showed significant differences in the distributions for: completed Command and General Staff College (X²=389.13 (df=1), p <.0001); Army-Baylor student (X²=28.96 (df=1), p <.001); civilian education completed (X²=127.38 (df=4), p <.001). There was not a significant Chi square for gender.

A predictive model using linear regression was developed to predict promotion to O5 (1=yes, 0=no). The equation developed was significant (F=392.72 (df=6,1612), p <.0001; R² = .594). The results confirmed that completion of Command and General Staff College is the most significant predictor of selection to O5. Army-Baylor HCA students are selected significantly more frequently (p < .016). There were significant differences between the year groups (p <.006). There was not a significant effect for sex. The contribution of the variables is summarized in Table 1.

Discussion
Completion of professional military and civilian graduate education does contribute to making O4s more competitive for selection for promotion to O5. It is not surprising that completion of Command and General Staff (or equivalent courses) is critical; a reading of any of the MSC Annual Reports documents that fact. Attendance at the Army-Baylor Health Care Administration course provides the knowledge, skills, and abilities while the residency phase puts the knowledge into practice under the supervision of a senior health care executive. The majority of the preceptors in the residency phase are themselves former Army-Baylor graduates.

An additional consideration of the impact of the Army-Baylor education is how well the graduates perform as senior health care executives. Mangelsdorff and associates examined evidence-based outcomes in the Military Health System. ¹¹During the time from 1994 to 2001, all (n=38) of the Army military medical treatment facilities (MTFs) were examined by the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO). Army MTFs with Army-Baylor graduates as the Deputy Commander for Administration (DCAs) received higher JCAHO scores and higher satisfaction scores. Army-Baylor graduates were more likely to be the DCA at Medical Centers. Promotion to O5 is a critical first step; having an impact on the Military Health System as a senior health care executive is important too.

References
1 Brown DS. Management Concepts and Practices. Washington, DC: Institute of Higher Defense Studies, National Defense University. 1989.

2 O’Connor MG, Brown DS. Military contributions to management. Defense Management Journal. Second quarter, 1980; 50-57.

3 Samler DJ, Ruggles RL. Harvard Business Review. March-April, 1966; 64-69.

4 Jacobs TO, Jaques E. Executive leadership. In Gal, R. and Mangelsdorff, A.D. (Eds.). Handbook of Military Psychology. Chichester, U.K.: Wiley, 1991.

5 Mintzberg H. The Nature of Managerial Work. New York: Harper & Row, 1973.

6 Nichols RS. The role of AMEDD psychologists in non-AMEDD agencies. In Mangelsdorff, A.D. (Ed.) Proceedings of Current Trends in Army Medical Service Psychology. 1973; 119-23 (DTIC: ADA 953387).

7 Nichols RS. How to get ahead in the Army and is it worth it? In Rath, F.J. (Ed). Proceedings of Current Trends in Army Medical Service Psychology. 1974; 32-34. (DTIC ADA 143409).

8 Finstuen K, Mangelsdorff AD. Executive competencies in health care research: A decade of assessment. AMEDD Journal. 2005.

9 Mangelsdorff AD, Rogers JR, Zucker KW, Thieschafer CL, Hagen JP, Finstuen K. Vision 21 Delphi panel: Senior Army Medical Service Corps officers’ vision of behaviors for success of future Medical Service Corps officers. Military Medicine. 1997; 162 (7), 450-52.

10 Mangelsdorff AD, Finstuen K, Pryor R. U.S. Army-Baylor University Graduate Program in Health Care Administration: 50 Years of Scholarship in Action. AMEDD Journal. 2005.

11 Mangelsdorff AD, Rogers JR, Finstuen K, Pryor R. U.S. Army-Baylor University Health Care Administration Program: Evidenced-based outcomes in the Military Health System. Journal of Health Administration Education. 2004; 21 (1), 81-89.

Table 1

Contributions of the variables to predict promotion to O5

		Unstandardized Coefficients		Standardized Coefficients	t	Significance
Model		B	Std. Error	Beta
	(Constant)	-12.605	4.709		-2.676	.008
	Above zone	-.583	.017	-.621	-34.252	.001
	Baylor Student	.052	.021	.039	2.419	.016
	Civilian Educ.	.044	.010	.070	4.354	.001
	CGSC Completed	.278	.021	.230	12.987	.001
	Year Eligible	.007	.002	.046	2.780	.006
	Sex	.038	.020	.030	1.853	.064

Notes:
Dependent variable:
Promote Selection for O5 (1=yes, 0=no)
Independent variables:
Sex: (1=male, 0=female)
CGSC completed (1=yes, 0=no)
Baylor student (1=yes, 0=no)
Civilian education: (5) doctorate (4) professional degree (3) master’s degree (2) college degree (1) some college
Year eligible: 1993 through 2004
Above zone: (-1) below zone (0) in zone (1) above zone