Army Branches for Civilian Success

[scoutpilot]

Beware of statistics. It may be true that certain specialties receive more favorable consideration among graduate school admissions committees, but the preponderance of those specialties may also be due to sampling bias.

Using USMA due to familiarity. Before concluding that a pilot or combat arms officer has an admissions advantage, I would consider a few questions :

• Is the population of those specialties greater than the population of the less represented specialties? For USMA combat arms branches have far greater numbers than non-combat arms and Aviation has significant representation.
• Does the competitiveness of obtaining those specialties create an asymmetric distribution of military graduate school applicants? Again using USMA, Aviation requires a high class rank compared to most other branches. Also interesting to note is that Infantry draws from the highest and lowest class ranks.
• Assuming equal qualifications, would an admissions committee favor one applicant over another based on military specialty? Only an admissions officer could answer this and the answer may differ among institutions.

In the past 4 classes of Harvard Business School, only one logistics officer and one AG have matriculated. Compare that to several dozen pilots, various SOF, infantry, and engineers. Only about half of the Army admits from any class are USMA grads.

 

[Firstie2020]

Beware of statistics. It may be true that certain specialties receive more favorable consideration among graduate school admissions committees, but the preponderance of those specialties may also be due to sampling bias.

Using USMA due to familiarity. Before concluding that a pilot or combat arms officer has an admissions advantage, I would consider a few questions :

• Is the population of those specialties greater than the population of the less represented specialties? For USMA combat arms branches have far greater numbers than non-combat arms and Aviation has significant representation.
• Does the competitiveness of obtaining those specialties create an asymmetric distribution of military graduate school applicants? Again using USMA, Aviation requires a high class rank compared to most other branches. Also interesting to note is that Infantry draws from the highest and lowest class ranks.
• Assuming equal qualifications, would an admissions committee favor one applicant over another based on military specialty? Only an admissions officer could answer this and the answer may differ among institutions.

In the past 4 classes of Harvard Business School, only one logistics officer and one AG have matriculated. Compare that to several dozen pilots, various SOF, infantry, and engineers. Only about half of the Army admits from any class are USMA grads.

That's unfortunate, because I am not very interested in any of the fields you listed.

I'm not going to go into one a field that doesn't interest me just because it will help me get into a graduate school. If I end up going to a lower ranked school due as a result of choosing a field that I will get to enjoy for the next 5 or more years, so be it.

I appreciate everyone's input and help.

 

[NJDadofDSUSMA2024Hopeful]

I'm perhaps less specifically qualified to answer than some, but I do have some real-world experience hiring MBAs and having lots of junior employees go to top MBA schools, and as a graduate of a top 10 program myself, I would say your GPA, recommendations and GMATs would have more bearing than your specific branch. Deciphering the nuances of army branches seems to be giving MBA admissions a lot of credit. The earlier responses about selection bias make sense to me. If you do well in your branch and your GMATs and have strong recommendations, I would think you'd be well-positioned for a top 7 school.

 

[scoutpilot]

I'm perhaps less specifically qualified to answer than some, but I do have some real-world experience hiring MBAs and having lots of junior employees go to top MBA schools, and as a graduate of a top 10 program myself, I would say your GPA, recommendations and GMATs would have more bearing than your specific branch. Deciphering the nuances of army branches seems to be giving MBA admissions a lot of credit. The earlier responses about selection bias make sense to me. If you do well in your branch and your GMATs and have strong recommendations, I would think you'd be well-positioned for a top 7 school.

Good points. I’d add a few other things to consider:

-Admissions has become an arms race. Median GMATs are moving higher and higher, along with GPAs.

-MBA admissions officers at top schools absolutely decipher the military. For one, they have a lot of experience with it. Thousands of military officers apply to places like HBS and Wharton annually. Secondly, these folks are pros. The woman who interviewed me had been doing the job for 21 years. She knows the military applicant world inside and out. Counting on them to not know the difference between a green beret and a loggie is a poor strategy.

All that said, OP is right to not choose a branch based on future plans. More importantly, he may not even want an MBA in 6-8 years. The economy may change. The desirability of the degree might change. We may have fully cooked the earth by then and be fighting over canned peas with loincloths on.

Focus on the near term stuff. I never planned to get an MBA as a cadet. I also planned to do 5 years. Instead I did 3x that and got an MBA.

The race is long.

 

[Soldiergriz]

I'm perhaps less specifically qualified to answer than some, but I do have some real-world experience hiring MBAs and having lots of junior employees go to top MBA schools, and as a graduate of a top 10 program myself, I would say your GPA, recommendations and GMATs would have more bearing than your specific branch. Deciphering the nuances of army branches seems to be giving MBA admissions a lot of credit. The earlier responses about selection bias make sense to me. If you do well in your branch and your GMATs and have strong recommendations, I would think you'd be well-positioned for a top 7 school.

Good points. I’d add a few other things to consider:

-Admissions has become an arms race. Median GMATs are moving higher and higher, along with GPAs.

-MBA admissions officers at top schools absolutely decipher the military. For one, they have a lot of experience with it. Thousands of military officers apply to places like HBS and Wharton annually. Secondly, these folks are pros. The woman who interviewed me had been doing the job for 21 years. She knows the military applicant world inside and out. Counting on them to not know the difference between a green beret and a loggie is a poor strategy.

All that said, OP is right to not choose a branch based on future plans. More importantly, he may not even want an MBA in 6-8 years. The economy may change. The desirability of the degree might change. We may have fully cooked the earth by then and be fighting over canned peas with loincloths on.

Focus on the near term stuff. I never planned to get an MBA as a cadet. I also planned to do 5 years. Instead I did 3x that and got an MBA.

The race is long.

This post is funny. If we are fighting over canned peas...seems infantry may indeed be the best way to go...

 

[Capt MJ]

Good points. I’d add a few other things to consider:

-Admissions has become an arms race. Median GMATs are moving higher and higher, along with GPAs.

-MBA admissions officers at top schools absolutely decipher the military. For one, they have a lot of experience with it. Thousands of military officers apply to places like HBS and Wharton annually. Secondly, these folks are pros. The woman who interviewed me had been doing the job for 21 years. She knows the military applicant world inside and out. Counting on them to not know the difference between a green beret and a loggie is a poor strategy.

All that said, OP is right to not choose a branch based on future plans. More importantly, he may not even want an MBA in 6-8 years. The economy may change. The desirability of the degree might change. We may have fully cooked the earth by then and be fighting over canned peas with loincloths on.

Focus on the near term stuff. I never planned to get an MBA as a cadet. I also planned to do 5 years. Instead I did 3x that and got an MBA.

The race is long.

Scout, your pithy posts never disappoint when you pop up. Canned peas and loincloths. I am still laughing.

 

[jl123]

As a former Combat Engineer I would probably favor a combat arms officer over an equally qualified non-combat arms officer. And an SOF officer conducting missions in Kandahar may have more compelling essay material than a Finance officer handling accounts payable at Ft. Drum.

However, I would still want more data about the group of applicants before drawing a conclusion. As Scout mentioned, business schools are driven by rankings and rankings are driven by test scores and GPA.

Schools also seek diverse classes. Imagine an admissions officer opening a file and thinking "not another (consultant, investment banker, pilot )."

 

[cb7893]

That's unfortunate, because I am not very interested in any of the fields you listed.

It's a little early and more than a little presumptuous to be fretting over imagined lost opportunities 5 years hence. It sounds a little like a High School Freshman who only makes the reserve football team. "Well, I guess I can kiss off that scholarship to Alabama."

I'm not going to go into one a field that doesn't interest me just because it will help me get into a graduate school. If I end up going to a lower ranked school due as a result of choosing a field that I will get to enjoy for the next 5 or more years, so be it.

This is a much better sentiment, but you haven't told us your major OR what really trips your trigger.

You sound hellbent on going to grad school as soon as possible. Your attitude may change, but you are smart to focus where your personal interests and strengths lie. Just remember there is much more to your branch than the GO Army description of the MOS. Mileage will certainly vary based on Duty Station and other factors. My DS's two criteria were: 1)where can I do something interesting and 2)where can I differentiate myself from other LT's, using my skills, and create opportunities not afforded to my peers. His experience as a Signal Officer has been entirely different than that of most of his BOLC class. The same applies to the branches listed by @scoutpilot . I would do my best to talk to as many 2LT's and 1LT's in those branches that interest you to catch those nuances.

Again, Best of luck!

 

[bruno]

There is something that really , really makes me disgusted by the original post because bluntly it reinforces a perception of mine that there is an increasingly large proportion of Service Academy cadets who are there because it’s such a sweet deal - and frankly don’t give a damn about the Army beyond the bare minimum of service they have to cough up. You are at USMA so you can become a leader of Soldiers -in an Army that has Soldiers getting killed and wounded in a war that it has been fighting for 18 years- not to get some resume bullet points. The right branch to go for is the most demanding branch and demanding assignments that you can get - and learn to LEAD troops- you won’t do that slacking in some remf assignment as an AG or CM or QM officer counting off the days until you can resign. To quote Bill Belichek: DO YOUR JOB and worry about an MBA program the year before you decide to get out.

 

[Jcleppe]

There is something that really , really makes me disgusted by the original post because bluntly it reinforces a perception of mine that there is an increasingly large proportion of Service Academy cadets who are there because it’s such a sweet deal - and frankly don’t give a damn about the Army beyond the bare minimum of service they have to cough up. You are at USMA so you can become a leader of Soldiers -in an Army that has Soldiers getting killed and wounded in a war that it has been fighting for 18 years- not to get some resume bullet points. The right branch to go for is the most demanding branch and demanding assignments that you can get - and learn to LEAD troops- you won’t do that slacking in some remf assignment as an AG or CM or QM officer counting off the days until you can resign. To quote Bill Belichek: DO YOUR JOB and worry about an MBA program the year before you decide to get out.

While I understand your point, Army recruitment does spend a lot of time touting the benefits of the Army, and what you do while serving, to how it will prepare you for a civilian job in the future. The " Join and learn a skill that will help you when you get out" line gets tossed around a lot. Even those the push the academies talk about how your education and the academy network will be a big plus when you leave the service. It's no wonder there are those that look at joining the military as a stepping stone.

I'm going to assume that your comment about AG,CM, and QM had more to do with those that are counting off the days until they ETS. It would be quite a gut punch to those many Army Officers that branch to these logistic and support branches every year to imply that they are simply slacking in their assignment. These branches are extremely necessary to a functioning Army and I have a lot of respect for those that choose this work. For a lot of officers and enlisted, these are the right branches.

 

[jl123]

Officers are trained to plan meticulously and develop contingencies for future changes. It would be a surprise if a cadet did not plan ahead for life after the army.

No cadet knows whether they want to make the military a career. Until they have served 2 - 3 years active duty they do not have the necessary experience to make that call. Life at West Point is very different from life in the army. I know many who graduated intending to serve a full career and got out after five, and many who intended to get out at five and went on to 20 - 30 years.

Also, many who get out in five continue to serve in the reserves and National Gaurd.

 

[jl123]

Preparing to go into battle in the first Gulf War, an Armor Company Commander was short of some critical parts. Frustrated with the supply chain, he called the supplier directly to try to order the parts with his credit card. Didn't work. What he didn't know was that the REMF's in Logistics were working as hard as he was to supply an army thousands of miles away - he got what he needed.

I suppose that CO would have been grateful to have a USMA classmate watching his back in supply (or Congress, State Department, General Dynamics, Boeing, etc.).

 

[cb7893]

There is something that really , really makes me disgusted by the original post because bluntly it reinforces a perception of mine that there is an increasingly large proportion of Service Academy cadets who are there because it’s such a sweet deal - and frankly don’t give a damn about the Army beyond the bare minimum of service they have to cough up.

I couldn't agree more, but I have to ask if this something that just now seems apparent to you. It reminds me of Capt. Renault who is "shocked, shocked" to find out that there is gambling at Rick's Cafe. @Jcleppe is spot on in suggesting your disgust should be directed at the SA's and their Alumni Networks. The Marines seem to be the only ones driving home the point that "You are here for one reason and one reason only."

As long as I have been posting here, transfer of skills to the civilian jobs has been a frequent topic...and it only stands to reason. The military is a pyramid organization which is constantly being fed new blood and the overwhelming majority of of O-1's coming in today will be victims of attrition, regardless of their branch/billet.

To quote Bill Belichek: DO YOUR JOB and worry about an MBA program the year before you decide to get out.

I especially like this quote, though not as an admonishment, but rather as simple advice to almost any fresh out of school early twenty something.

I just looked up the definition of "REMF". Isn't that about 80% of the US military?

 

[billyb]

I thought USMA was moving towards almost everyone going combat arms these days?

 

[UHBlackhawk]

There is something that really , really makes me disgusted by the original post because bluntly it reinforces a perception of mine that there is an increasingly large proportion of Service Academy cadets who are there because it’s such a sweet deal - and frankly don’t give a damn about the Army beyond the bare minimum of service they have to cough up. You are at USMA so you can become a leader of Soldiers -in an Army that has Soldiers getting killed and wounded in a war that it has been fighting for 18 years- not to get some resume bullet points. The right branch to go for is the most demanding branch and demanding assignments that you can get - and learn to LEAD troops- you won’t do that slacking in some remf assignment as an AG or CM or QM officer counting off the days until you can resign. To quote Bill Belichek: DO YOUR JOB and worry about an MBA program the year before you decide to get out.

I disagree with just about all of this.
First off, any person attending a service academy or going through ROTC is already doing more than most of the country when it comes to service.
Second, everyone goes into the military for different reasons. Some of the “gung ho” types end up being very poor leaders while some of those looking to “do their time and get out” are great leaders. Heck, my DW went enlisted then ROTC because she was dirt poor and couldn’t afford college otherwise. And when I say dirt poor I mean some of her houses had dirt floors. She made it clear she wanted to go reserves, go to grad school and get out once her time in the Guard was up. She was blind sided when she was selected for RA and active duty. It was NOT her choice and she tried to get it changed, but then saluted the flag pole and moved out when it became clear that “needs of the Army” outweighed her PG plans. Thirty years later... she’s still in.
Third, your characterization of QM and others as “REMFS” is demeaning to those who serve and are sometimes killed serving in those critical branches. My wife’s first combat was Desert Storm. She was attached to a reserve water purification unit as an active duty augment. Enroute to the unit air raid sirens went off so she took shelter. After the all clear she grabbed her stuff and continued to the unit only to find that it had been hit by a SCUD and 13 of those “REMFS” from the 14th QM detachment were killed. She ended up being assigned to an MP BDE instead and spent the war as a REMF QM officer pushing forward with front line troops while helping to collect POWs. Look through the rolls of recent West Point graduates who have been killed in Iraqistan and you see the same. Many combat arms, but some of them are also those “REMF’s” you deride.
I can give countless stories of “REMFS” and their service in Iraq and Afghanistan. Heck, the soldiers I felt the most sympathy for were the “REMF” 88M’s who spent their tours getting ambushed and IED’ed all while getting beans and bullets to the “head of the tiger” but being treated like crap in the process.
Finally, not everyone is made to be a great combat arms officer and those who are still need to learn about logistics. If you read the story of Grant he was somewhat of a REMF during the Mexican War as he was primarily involved in logistics, but it gave him an understanding of the necessity and complexity of supplying an army during combat.
So no, a person should not necessarily just push for a combat arm because “that’s the thing to do”. They should do so because they have a passion for leading troops in that branch. And I have no heartburn about cadets who are doing their “five and getting out”. Even if they do they will be paying back their education. Sometimes with the last full measure.

 

[bruno]

You folks are awfully understanding of a USMA First Classman who is starting his career in the Army wondering how to maximize his/ her potential to get out. To me - that's a pure waste of a slot at USMA and they are commissioning a waste on my dime.
And if you are so accepting of that approach - tell me why there is a need for the US Army to run one of the most selective and costly colleges in the country when its graduates are apparently not held to a retention standard higher than someone who got a scholarship as an instate student at Whatsamatta State University? (in fact it's the other way around- the ROTC cadet only had a year to decide if they would commit or not- despite the Army spending 1/4 as much on the instate college 4 yr scholarship as they do on the USMA grad).

Personally if you think there isn't something really really wrong with a Firstie posting: "what branch should I commission into so I can get out to my best advantage in 5 years" then I believe that most of you don't get the concept all that well- because the concept is to be a professional leader of Soldiers. If once he's been one for a while and decides it's not a great fit that's one thing- but to start out preparing to quit? How does that square with the mission statement "values of Duty, Honor, Country and prepared for a career of professional excellence and service to the Nation as an officer in the United States Army." Talk about devotion to the Army over self: "I haven't started my career yet but I'm planning on blowing this pop stand as soon as I can, so put me where I can optimize my exit strategy". BTW- while I'm sure that the Army values and needs all it's branches, bluntly- it doesn't need West Pointers to lead them. The Army directive for this year was that 81% of commissions should be in Combat Arms. http://www.pointerview.com/2018/11/...-of-the-army-for-the-class-of-2019-and-beyond. Since 81% of the Army is not in Combat Arms- I'm thinking that the Army believes it spent a lot of time and money training those Cadets to be leading from up front. Sorry if it makes me a neanderthal but I have no use for this Cadets question or the mind set.

 

[UHBlackhawk]

You folks are awfully understanding of a USMA First Classman who is starting his career in the Army wondering how to maximize his/ her potential to get out. To me - that's a pure waste of a slot at USMA and they are commissioning a waste on my dime.
And if you are so accepting of that approach - tell me why there is a need for the US Army to run one of the most selective and costly colleges in the country when its graduates are apparently not held to a retention standard higher than someone who got a scholarship as an instate student at Whatsamatta State University? (in fact it's the other way around- the ROTC cadet only had a year to decide if they would commit or not- despite the Army spending 1/4 as much on the instate college 4 yr scholarship as they do on the USMA grad).

Personally if you think there isn't something really really wrong with a Firstie posting: "what branch should I commission into so I can get out to my best advantage in 5 years" then I believe that most of you don't get the concept all that well- because the concept is to be a professional leader of Soldiers. If once he's been one for a while and decides it's not a great fit that's one thing- but to start out preparing to quit? How does that square with the mission statement "values of Duty, Honor, Country and prepared for a career of professional excellence and service to the Nation as an officer in the United States Army." Talk about devotion to the Army over self: "I haven't started my career yet but I'm planning on blowing this pop stand as soon as I can, so put me where I can optimize my exit strategy". BTW- while I'm sure that the Army values and needs all it's branches, bluntly- it doesn't need West Pointers to lead them. The Army directive for this year was that 81% of commissions should be in Combat Arms. http://www.pointerview.com/2018/11/...-of-the-army-for-the-class-of-2019-and-beyond. Since 81% of the Army is not in Combat Arms- I'm thinking that the Army believes it spent a lot of time and money training those Cadets to be leading from up front. Sorry if it makes me a neanderthal but I have no use for this Cadets question or the mind set.

Probably because I’ve been around long enough to know how this often plays out. Those who say they are “five and dive” often stay in while some of the “gung ho” types fall flat on their faces as officers and probably need to get out after five years.
My DW initially picked QM because it was the shortest OBC at the time and she thought it would look good on her resume for grad school. She ended up enjoying it and doing very well. She subsequently branch transferred to Aviation after the Gulf War and currently serves in another branch. So much for her “five and dive” plan.
As long as he performs in his selected branch I really don’t get wound up on his motives.

 

[jl123]

A few observations on performance, goals, and motivation from thirty five years of experience:

• Performance does not diminish because current assignment does not align with long term goals. High performers perform well because it is in their nature; the same can be said of poor performers.
• The best leaders I worked for helped me achieve my goals even if those goals were outside of that particular organization. This was particularly true of the LTC I worked for before leaving the military.
• Many of my best and most loyal employees were those that I helped grow into other careers beyond my company. I was happy to have them for a few months or years.

I have no problem with Firsties analyzing all consequences of their branch choice. As Bernard Baruch said, "I don't cross a bridge until I come to it, but I always like to lay down a pontoon ahead of time." Many of those same Firsties will end up "diving" thirty years later.

 

[UHBlackhawk]

One other point about a person’s motives and goals.
In my years of reading about military leadership I never remember reading about a correlation between a desire to be a combat leader and success as a combat leader. As a matter of fact, history is replete with examples of reluctant yet effective combat leadership. Joshua Chamberlain did not start out wanting to be a military leader, yet his defense of Little Round Top has become a study of military leadership throughout the world. By the end of the war Chamberlain was well respected as one of the best combat generals in the Union Army.
Dick Winters wanted nothing more than to find a small quiet patch of Pennsylvania where he could go and forget about the trade of war. As a combat leader, however, he was widely regarded as one of the best. His assault on Breacourt Manor is still studied as a textbook hasty attack.
I’m more concerned about how someone performs when the rubber hits the pavement than their long term goals in life. I hardly consider it “quitting” to have goals in life outside the military.

 

[USMCGrunt]

What an interesting thread. Youthful views of a military career not yet started and sage views from those that have been downrange a few times.

Life seldom follows the path you think it will. The OP is right to think about these things and I suppose an anonymous forum is appropriate to post questions like this seeking answers. In my day, these questions would have been whispered to trusted friends but most people I knew went through some type of questioning process. I suppose it is natural.

There are plans to become "Lifers" and others who will "5 and dive". There are those seeking career building MOS's and those seeking career designations because they are of sincere interest. There are even those who let "fate" have its way. There are also periodic Reduction in Force (RIF's), career ending injuries, bad choices and a whole host of other outside forces. Make the best out of whatever hand you are dealt.

To the OP, good luck controlling your destiny. Take care of your troops and accomplish the mission. Success in the Army will translate into whatever your future civilian career will bring.