I recently attended my 20 year reunion at the
US Military Academy, and got to catch up with friends I hadn't seen in two decades. I told my wife it was probably the best time I ever had at West Point, cadet years included. I had no idea I was going to enjoy catching up as much as I did and I think most of us in attendance felt the same way. We all vowed to stay in better contact with one another, and in some way this
Blog entry is intended to help facilitate that communication.
I remember, in thinking back, the incredible emphasis placed on our SAT scores, grade point averages and the other (so called) performance indicators in my early career years. And today I have to ask myself just how significant are those indicators really and how reliable are they? Take Patton for example, a guy who took five years to graduate from West Point, but by all accounts was a superb tactician and leader.
One thing I found interesting was finding out who was still in the Army and who had gotten out. For example in my cadet company (C2) there were only two attendees still in uniform. John Halstead, now an instructor at the academy and Jack Maloney, who, it should be noted has the rare distinction of being a triple century man. That means he marched over 300 hours of "punishment" tours while he was at the academy, yet he has his head on straight today and is very successful by all standards.
My point being that without much of a track record early in a career, I can understand to some degree why we use potential indicators to help stagger the field. However, my feeling is we should not place too much emphasis on them because they do not seem to really be very reliable at indicating future potential.