I’ll start by saying that I fully agree with your 72 hour rule as a philosophy, as a standard. But…I do think there is some craft to this as well, basically art to the science. This is by exception, and requires a delicate hand. But have I or my subordinates (with my knowledge) done any of the following? Yes.

These are Staff examples. “Temporarily misplaced” personnel action documents because there was some background processing/green tab discussions that I was entrusted not to disclose and it was more appropriate for me to tell someone to come back in a few days then betray the trust of my Bn Cdr. Held an action (usually an award) until the submitter gave us the assistance they had been promising to us; that a leader (almost always another Staff OIC/NCOIC) had submitted to award very late AND was “asking for a favor” of us walking that award through the process, and therefore discarding other priorities because they were not doing things to standard.

A commander-related one that I’ve experienced is that a Soldier puts leave or pass in for a 3-4 months in advance, say a family wedding or popular long weekend. But, the Soldier is going to be red on their MEDPROS (PHA) the month prior to that requested leave. So, instead of kicking the packet back, instead the commander says, hey, I’ve got your packet on my desk and I was ready to sign it, but I saw that your PHA will be due. Show me that you’ve made an appointment for NLT X time frame to stay in compliance, and it’s signed. Psychologically, the Soldier knowing that the packet is on the commander’s desk and is sooo close to being signed is a huge motivator for the Soldier to, in effect, be proactive.

I again agree with your 3 day rule. But I would suggest that some other motivational techniques may cause breaking that rule. And these are times, when deliberately decided, that I suggest that it’s appropriate to do so.

Ray, I’ll answer to what I interprete your question is first. I will say the answer of transparency is 2 things in tandem: the context of the action and the source of the information for the status. If it’s a standard action, not personally sensitive, and it’s routine for a senior leader to review it, then no issue expressing this to the submitter/owner of the action. For all intents and purposes, that is “public knowledge” for that leader. In short, whenever the Bn Cdr yelled out of his office door at me to say that the Bde Cdr had just signed a personnel action, that equated to public knowledge, I would not shy away from telling a CC that status. But, if the status was akin to a closed door conversation, or the person gave me information that they felt was close hold (PII, not classified), then I would maintain that close hold unless I saw significant reason to violate that. That person entrusted their secrets to me, and that is contingent on me not sharing that information. For me, it was much more about working to improve the entire experience of working personnel actions , even if that meant short-term hiding some info from the person whose action it was. They mattered in the short run, but in the long run it was about improving reputation, trust, and legitimacy of the process across S1 channels at the CO, BN, and BDE level. Back to the individual though, that means a good, down-to-earth delivery of a status without violating the trust of the source of my info; that basically means vague descriptions, but it doesn’t mean I’m not paying attention to that person and answering questions to what I believe is the fullest responsible extent. I will even go so far as to say that going through this process of shielding peers, subordinates, and even superiors from the buearcracy of this processing is a clear but not obvious form of leadership. Here’s an example of what I would say to a PL asking about their OER – “I know you’re worried about your packet/OER/etc, and (status here – I just talked to BC yesterday about it – glossing over their expressed career concerns about PL, or the fact that X was missing, or any expressed views on the CC writing the OER). It’s good that you’re balancing your needs with taking care of your PLT. But, we’ve talked and I check on OERs x2 / week. I’ve just briefed the Boss on OERs, so we’re all moving forward on it. Stay focused for your range week, and then come check in after your back from the field. I’ll have a new status then.” I provide enough info to answer their question, while still leaving myself room to manuveur and not breaking trust of those I work with. If I have to ask someone if I can quote them on something, it usually means I shouldn’t (rule of thumb, not written in stone).

Can you rephrase your comment about “process” and helping someone understand how they might be in the wrong? I’m not following your logic about how that ties into alterations of SOP for personnel actions.

Ah, I see! Okay, awards example – I can detail just what you did there, but I cannot stop anyone from submitting the award, especially as the S1. Squarely in the duty description. I can inform them of likely consequence and routing and questions they will be asked to either help them be successful or to lead them back to the drawing board (or just tell them the commander’s policy). An action is harder. Schools requests really shouldn’t go to S1 IMO, clogs up the system. But say

Say a LT did submit a school request with poor timing. But that 4187 was signed by their commander, so as the S1 there’s limited capability. I usually handled that by saying you have 2 COAs, one saves you time and other formally gets it kicked back, depends on what message you’re sending. It’s providing them (CC, in this case) information to make an informed decision.

This speaks to my OCD! Haha. Thank you for sharing that article. I LOVE batching my time. I am SO much more productive and it really motivated me just to set up the plan/schedule to do it.

I always believed that personnel actions needed to be something you closed out with at the end of each day (whenever possible). I will NEVER forget the time I watched another Commander ream one of her staff for asking her to prioritize signing something for one of her Soldiers. It was sitting right there on her desk and she said, “I will get to it when I get to it. I have other important things to do.” The repercussions of that action probably haunted her for the rest of her Command time, but I bet she never knew that. Your actions have MEANING. Never treat a personnel action as an “extra thing” you have to do. It should be built into your time. You should also schedule in self-care, lunches, PT, and morale boosting activities whenever possible too- these are all the things that tend to fall by the wayside when we are busy. They are the things you need most when you’re busy! Program them in as well. For me? Thursday mornings, I go in a little late to work so that I can play with my puppy and have breakfast at home, versus a smoothie on the go. Obviously this isn’t always possible, but it’s a great motivator for me to look forward to.