I agree with ADRP 6-0, Mission Command, in their importance of diversity on a team. The diversity of a team is broadly defined about what unique things they bring in the ability to achieve the mission. Especially how we frame problems and develop solutions.

“3-10. Effective teams synchronize individual efforts toward a common goal. They promote the exchange of ideas, creativity, and the development of collective solutions. They collaborate across the team to develop and improve processes. The variety of knowledge, talent, expertise, and resources in a team can produce better understanding and alternative options faster than one individual can achieve alone. Successful mission command fosters a greater understanding of the operational environment and solution development through teamwork. This results in teams that—
Are adaptive and anticipate transitions.

Accept risks to create opportunities.

Influence friendly, neutrals, adversaries, enemies, and unified action partners.

The ultimate team outcome is successful mission accomplishment.” (Emphasis added)

Ok so what does that mean for me at the Company level? To me it means, who is filling those key billets in your Company HQ. Your armorer, CBRN specialist, personnel clerks, drivers, RTO, HQ NCO are all folks who have been pulled from their primary MOS. Extra duty positions, such as UPL, master driver, and MFT, UMO, EO & SHARP Reps are other demanding duties that will consume significant time from MOS expertise and if they are leaders, because most of these positions must be filled by NCOs, what is that doing for time to train subordinates? Other positions such as snipers and master gunners are great broadening positions, but we must balance them against getting that Soldier prepared the next level of responsibility and leadership.

We must resist the temptation to meet short term mission accomplishment at the expense of talent for the long term benefit of the Army. Yes it is beneficial for me now to stack my mortar section leader/PSG with a ton of extra responsibilities, but I do so knowing they will limit his ability to turn his specialists and sergeants into staff NCOs.  I take the personal view that every assignment should be a position a person will grow with and contribute to the organization in the short and long term.

As we consider diversity, we should also talk about how we are molding junior officers for senior positions. Is there diversity in our senior officer corps? Can you reasonably predict with relative accuracy most of our GOs career paths? Does our organization punish junior officers for choosing divergent experiences? The blogsphere has lit up with personnel mismanagement articles directly focused on why we are boxing officers and NCOs into a very clearly defined path for what success looks like with little room for career flexibility.