Analysis of Satisfaction with the Army.
Figures 3 through 8 show the percentage of
respondents who reported that they were
satisfied with their supervisors, promotion
opportunities, type of work, co-workers, pay,
and family issues (satisfaction with pay was
assessed by using officers’ perceptions of how
their pay and benefits compared with the
civilian sector).

Black officers were significantly more
likely than either White or Hispanic officers to
report that they were satisfied with their
supervisors, promotions, the work they did,
pay, and family issues. The only dimension on
which Black officers were Jess satisfied than
White officers was satisfaction with co-
workers. Hispanic officers, compared to
White officers, were more satisfied with pay
and family issues; were less satisfied with
supervisors and co-workers; and were equally
Satisfied with promotions and the work they
did.

Compared with male officers, female
officers were significantly more satisfied with
their pay, but were significantly less satisfied
with family issues. There were no statistically
significant differences between male and
female officers’ satisfaction with supervisors,
promotions, the work they did, or their co-
workers.

2 0%

3

=

Z sox

a

£

Econ

z

2

Bsn

3

&

$ ae

°

2

Ey

ars :
BLACK HISPANIC WHITE MALES FEMALES
OFFICERS OFFICERS OFFICERS
SEavo% SESH SEW SEWA% SESW

Figure 3. Satisfaction with Supervisors

14

100%

ow

fled with Promotions.

2
=
z

on

MALES FEMALES

BLACK HISPANIC WHITE
OFFICERS OFFICERS OFFICERS

SEW% — SEWS% — SE=WA% SEW9%

SEeWt%

Figure 4. Satisfaction with Promotions

z

5

Fd

rs

3

2

3

5

é

5

A

g

5

x
BLACK HISPANIC WHITE MALES FEMALES
OFFICERS OFFICERS OFFICERS
SEodg% — SEawSK SEI Seon — SEauam

Figure 5. Satisfaction with the Work Itself

2

% Who are Satisfied with Co-Workers.

BLACK HISPANIC WHITE MALES FEMALES
OFFICERS OFFICERS OFFICERS
SES © SESWS% — SEE1% SEWN% SEMI

Figure 6. Satisfaction with Co-workers



KGROUND INFORMATION

112.

103.

104.

105.

106.

107.

What is your current rank?
Oat
Out
Ocpt
OMAJ
OutTc
OcoL

In what year were you born?

19 QOOOO®
- MOOOOOQOOO®

When you were growing up, did you have a
parent/guardian who was career active duty
military?

OvYes

ONo

Are you male or female?

OMate
O Female

How many dependent children do you have (for
whom you provide over half of their support)?

, ONone

108.

109.

110.

111.

O1
O2

©8 or more

How many of your dependent children are now
living with you?

ODoes not apply; | have no dependent children.

ONone

How old is your youngest dependent child?
© Does not apply; ! have no dependent children.
O Under 2 years old

O24

ON

O17

© 18 or over

Are you or your spouse currently expecting a
child (i.e., next 9 months)?

OyYes

ONo

Are you of Hispanic/Spanish origin or ancestry?
ONo

Oves, Mexican, Mexican American, Chicano

OvYes, Puerto Rican

OvYes, Cuban

Ov es, other Hispanic/Spanish

113.

114,

115,

116.

1996 SOC -17 - =

What is your racial background?
© American indian, Eskimo or Aleut
O Asian or Pacific Islander

OBlack

OWhite

© Other (Please list on page 19.)

What is the highest level of education you have
completed?
O Some college
O Bachelor's degree
O Some graduate school credits
© Master's degree or equivalent
© Doctorate or professional degree, such as MD,
DDS, or JD

What was/were your major field(s) of study?
Include completed undergraduate and graduate
degrees. MARK ALL THAT APPLY.

ODoes not apply; | did not receive a degree.

O Biological Sciences

© Businegs/Finance/Public Administration

© Computer Sciences/Statistics

© Engineering/Applied Sciences

O Humanities

Olaw

© Medical/Dental

OvNtursing

O Physical Sciences/Math

CO Social Sciences/Education

© Other (Please list on page 19.)

How close/far is the fit between your college
major(s) and your branch duties?

O Very close

OClose

© Borderline

OFar

O Very far

What is your current status?
ORA (Regular Army)

© OTRA (Other Than Regular Army)
© Other (Please list on page 19.)

sae



7 -
ARMY LIFE EXPECTATIONS -: =
—— _ -
64. If you were to stay in the Army, to what extent Now, please use the scale below to indicate how -—
would you expect to... willing or reluctant you are to accept the = j
MARK A RESPONSE FOR EACH. conditions/requirements you expect inan Army career, mm 5
[ Much less than | like -=
[ Less than I like 70. How do you feel about... -
[ About right for me MARK A RESPONSE FOR EACH. -=
i= . More than I like -
[ Much more than | like [ Very willing to accept -
[ Somewhat willing to accept al
‘participate in field exercises and/or [ Mixed feelings or neutral -=
‘combat training? . lO} OO} [ ‘Somewhat reluctant to accept =
work in your functional area? eeeee [ Very reluctant to accept -
‘work in your branch? . @eeee) -
the number of weeks per year you would -=
65. How many weeks would you expect to spend typically spend away from home? @eeceeom..
away from home in a typical year (including TDY, -
field exercises, training, alerts, etc.)? the number of unaccompanied tours you -=
IF LESS THAN 10, START WITH “0.” would probably have over the course of -=
acareer? @eeeeem.!
Weeks OO@O@O® =
Away MO@®O@QOOO@O the amount of flexibility you would have to =
adjust your schedule or take time off for -=
66. How many unaccompanied tours (6 months or personal or family reasons? eeeceem..
more) would you expect to have over the course of -=
a 20-year career in the Army? the amount of control you would have =
over the timing of trips/assignments that -=
ODOOOO® would take you away from home? OIOIO|IO|IO| =
-=
67. In most Army assignments, how much flexibility the frequency with which personal or =
would you have in your daily schedule to adjust family plans would be disrupted by job -=
your hours or take time off for personal or family demands/Army requirements? eeee lo} =
reasons? =
OaAlmost no flexibility the average length of time you would stay =
OA little flexibility in one location before a PCS? OIOIOIOIO| =
OSome flexibility -=
O Alot of flexibility the number of PCS moves over the =
O Almost total flexibility course of your career? loloicioio] =
-
68. In most Army assignments, how much control 71. How difficult do you think it would be for you to -
would you typically have over the timing find a good civilian job right now, considering =
{i.e., length and when you leave) of trips or both your own qualifications and current labor -=
assignments that would take you away from market conditions? -
home? O Very difficult -
O Almost no contro! O Difficutt -
OA little contro! ONot particularly difficult or easy -_
OSome contro! O€asy -=
OA lot of control Overy easy -
O Almost total contro! -—
72. How difficult would it be for you to leave the Army =m
69. How often are personal or family plans in the next year or so, given your current personal mm = -
(vacations, family outings, special dinners, etc.) or family situation? = *
likely to be disrupted by job demands/Army O Very difficult =
requirements? O Difficult =
O Very seldom ONot particularly difficult or easy -=
O Occasionally OEasy -
O About half the time O Very easy -
OFrequently =
O Almost always -
=
-

1996S0C-13 =



86 904 91 @INWSU] Yoseasay AwJy *S"n (208) saseseg 199130 UO
rz 99140 Aaaing jauuosieg Auuy A@AiNS 966} OU) WO. BEG

LNAWSYILSY TLNN AVLS-
AVd
SNOILOWOUd
SANSSI ATINVA
MYOM YISHL

"" " “HLIM G3alsSILVS 43a--

‘'"OL ATAMTT
LSOW Wav SYHOMAO MOVTd



1082-292 NSA
1082-219 (£02)
O09S-E6ezz WA ‘eUpuexely
enusay Jemoyues}; 100S

99130 Aeving jauuosieg Awiy
enySU] Youwesey Auy “s"N
Aq posedold

NOISSIININOD AO
AQYUNOS AP SAGNLILLV
Y¥49Ide4d0 AO NOSIYVdINOD



Table 3. Current Career Intent for Officers by Source of Commission

Survey Items

Which of the following best describes your current career

intentions?
Plan to stay until retirement or beyond

Plan to stay beyond my obligation, but am undecided

about staying until retirement.

Undecided whether I will stay upon completion of my

obligation

Probably or definitely will leave upon completion of my

obligation

Planning/leaning towards an Army career at each of the

following seven points in time:
1-When I began pre-commissioning training
2-When I received my commission
3-After first leadership assignment
4-After first staff-type assignment
5-At the end of the Advanced Course
6-After first company command assignment
7-Right now

ROTC-S ROTC-NS USMA

SE=+/-2% SE=+/-2% SE=+/-2%
62% 75% 54%
18% 13% 17%
9% 5% 12%
12% 6% 17%
54% 56% 55%
68% 74% 63%
68% 75% 63%
60% 71% 34%
75% 82% 72%
86% 88% 84%
65% 73% 57%

As shown in the lower half of Table 3, the
same pattern is apparent when officers were
asked to assess their career intentions at
various points over time—ie., ROTC non-
scholarship graduates were the most likely and
USMA graduates were the least likely to
report that they were planning on, or leaning
towards, an Army career at six of the seven
points of time.

Possible Reasons Why USMA Graduates
May Leave Early: Additional analyses
indicated that USMA graduates were
significantly more likely than ROTC graduates
to believe that a career move into the civilian
sector would be easy and would have positive
benefits, not only in terms of their own

individual career prospects and benefits, but
also for their families.

Table 4 shows that USMA graduates were
most likely to believe that civilian life offers
better opportunities in terms of pay, standard
of living, overall quality of life, advancement
opportunities in one’s chosen field, total
family income, and spouse/family satisfaction,
and that the transition to civilian life would be
easy or very easy for them.

In contrast, ROTC non-scholarship
graduates were least likely to report that
civilian life offers better opportunities and
were most likely to report that their spouses
supported an Army career and were satisfied
with the Army life and the Army's support



86 G24 91 eyNHSU] YouwesaY Awy “S'N (908) siaas29 499130 UO
9 3910 Aaaing jouuosieg Auy A@AINS 966} Ou) WO BIeG

(Bulzisumop *6"a) s}uaAq jUuedINZ--
s}usWSSessy-}|aS--

Ayisuddoijdg u0l}U9}90Y--

SUOISID9G 1998125 UO S9dUeN]U]--

OjI7] UBIIIAID “SA Awiy--

WON ‘IOSIAIOdNS ‘sidaq--UO0!I}ORJSI}eS--

passeippy senss| @
papuodsai S19d1jj0 OOOO UEY) S101

Sdsa3gdVO YADIeAO NO ASAUNS 9661

_ ASAYNS 4O SNDO4 >



86 994 91
oL

eyNySU| YoJeesey Auy ‘sn (90S) Si90789 109130 UO
290130 Asaing jeuuosieg Awiy A®@AANS 966} 04} Wo’ ByeEG

SUY
JEQUIOD Ul 9q 0} }UBM pUe Ul 9G <q

soljnp youejqg pue suolje}Dedxe
US9MjEq |} BSO]O & O}LOIPU! <gas

«@PIIOYD ISA,
JO YOURIG JID} POAIGDO) SACU <gam

** 0} Ajay] JSOW B12 SIBDIJJO VINSN

HONWHE HLIMNOILOVESILVS



86 994 91 e1Nysu] Yoseesey Ay *s'N (908) Siea1eD 19910 UO

20130 Aeaing jouuosied Auy A®SAINS 966} OY} WO B}eG

JODIJJO UL SB SOIINP 119} JO
s}oedse pa}0a/9S a]puey 0} Way} posedaid
GHuiuies} Huluoissiwwod-aid yey} Woda, 0}

“* AlOyll
JSOW 31 SIBOINIO VWINSN <q

""* AJO¥I| ISCO] O1e SABOIJJO
diysiejoyos-UON DLO <=

~ ONINIVHL ONINOISSINWOD-aud =]



86 494 91 eIMNsU YOIWesey Away ‘s'N (908) sieese9 4991330 uO
vk 29130 Aeaing jauuosieg Auy A@AINS 966}. 84} WO’ eyeG

$199129 JI@Y} JOAO SOW}
SNOMA }e PUL MOU YO JUSWALI}O, |1UN
uN Away 94} ul Aeys 0} JUS}! Ue Oda 0}

“"" AJayI] JSOW 31e SIBDIJJO
diysiejoydS-UON DLOY <a

=" ALOMI
JSE9| BIE SIDOIJO VINSN <n



86 404 91 eynyWsSU| Yoswesey Away “SN (908) sasesed 1991330 UO
et 89130 AeAins jauuosieg Awuy Aaaing 966} &4} Wold Beg

Asea Aiaan/Aseo
2q PINOM d9}1| UBIIAID O} UO!ISUB,} -
Oj!| UBIJIAID Ul 18}}8q oq Pjnom shui} -
-yourig 4194} YUM peysies ase Aau} -
8AI}D9y0 SI Hulures} HuluoIss!wwod-aid -

"** Woda, 0} Ajayi] SOW a1e SIBTIO VINSN

FIDYNOS ONINOISSINWOD NO G4SVa SYzI/44IO
DNOWMV SAINAYAAAIC TWNIGNLILLY FYV FAUGAHL

AYVININNS



86 qe4 91 eyNysU] Yoeesey Auy ‘S'n (908) S100189 109110 UO
9 8010 Aeaing jauuosiedg Auy ASAINS 966} 84} WO. BEG

(6uizisumop *"6"d) syUusAW U91IND--
s]U9sWISSessy-}/9S--

Ayisuddoig uolUus}eYH--

SUOISINEG 1990185 UO S9dUAaN|jU]--

OJ! UBIIIAID “SA Awy--

YOM ‘AOSIAJOdNS ‘si9ed--Uu01}DRJSI}eS--

possoippy sonss| @
papuodsal Si9d1JJO 000‘O} UBY} S10 @

SYSSaYVO YSADISAO NO ASAUNS 9661

AAAYNS 4O SNDO4



APPENDIX A

1996 SURVEY ON OFFICER CAREERS



117.

118.

119.

.

Which of the following best describes your current career intentions?

OI plan to stay in the Army beyond 20 years.

CO I plan to stay in the Army until retirement (e.g., 20 years or sooner).

CO I plan to stay in the Army beyond my obligation, but am undecided about staying until retirement.
Olam undecided whether | will stay in the Army upon completion of my obligation.

© | will probably leave the Army upon completion of my obligation.

© | will definitely leave the Army upon completion of my obligation.

To which major command, agency, or field operating agency are you assigned?
OUS Army Europe and Seventh Army (USAREUR)

OUS Army Pacific (USARPAC)

O 8th US Army, Korea (EUSA)

OUS Army South (USARSO)

OUS Army Materiel Command (AMC)

O Military Traffic Management Command (MTMC)

OUS Army Criminal investigation Command (CIDC)

OUS Army Forces Command (FORSCOM)

OUS Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC)
OUS Army Medical Command (MEDCOM)

OUS Army information Systems Command (USAISC)
OUS Army Military District of Washington (MDW)

O Secretary of Defense or Joint Activity (JCS, DIA, and Other Defense Agencies)
QUIS Army Intelligence and Security Command (INSCOM)
OUS Military Academy (USMA)

OUS Army Recruiting Command (USAREC)

OUS Army Corps ot Engineers (COE)

OUS Army Special Operations Command (USASOC)

OUS Army Space and Strategic Defense Command (SSDC)
O Army Staff or Field Operating Agencies

© Other (Please list cn page 19.)

Please print your Social Security Number in the boxes below; then fill in the circle with the matching number.

2209

OOO!
O«

(efoto)
899905000

{Note: Use of Social Sec umbers is authorized by Executive Order 9397. Only persons involved in collecting or preparing the
informanca for analysis wil have access to completed questionnaires. Only group statistics will be reported.!

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME
AND COOPERATION!

= = _ 1996 SOC -18


86 qe4 9} ainyysu] Youeasey Auuy “sn (90S) s1901e9 18910 UO
s 20130 Aeaing jouuosieg Auuy ASAIN 966} OY} Wo. BEG

OUI AAC JEpUuar)
pue avy Aq seouejiedxy pure sepnyyy 42010 »

Autly ay] aaeaT
OUM S429IJO Buljeluasayiq S41oj9ey Jo sisAjeuy 4

SapnyLy ,Sl294JO uo UMopmeiq
9Y] PUB OdWALdO JO $}J2ajJF BY] Jo sasAjeuy A

UOISSIWIWOD Jo a21nog Aq siolneyag UoHLY
pue sapnjiny ,S42921JO uaemjeq sdiysuojjejay »%

‘apnjouy IJIAA SUOdey sinjny



FOREWORD

In 1987, the Vice Chief of Staff of the Army tasked the U.S. Army Research Institute for the
Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) with continuing the officer research initiated by the U.S.
Military Academy in the mid-1980’s (Project Proteus). In 1988, ARI substantially revised both the
Proteus survey and the sampling plan. This marked the beginning of the Longitudinal Research on
Officer Careers (LROC) survey research program. The LROC program called for similar surveys to be
mailed to a longitudinal sample of company grade officers (second lieutenant through captain) each
year over a number of years. Surveys were administered in 1988, 1989, 1990, and 1992.

In 1995, ARI revised the LROC survey and expanded the sampling plan to include a cross-
sectional sample of officers at all ranks (second lieutenant through colonel). The revised survey was
renamed Survey on Officer Careers (SOC) and was first fielded in April of 1996. The Army Personnel
Survey Office at ARI conducts the SOC biennially. A number of questions in the SOC track to the
LROC survey and will allow a trend analysis linked to 1988 as ARI continues this longitudinal project.

The SOC continues to provide data on the values, attitudes, family situations, and career
experiences of Army officers who are serving in Army Competitive Category branches. The SOC
results are being used to test models of work, career, family, and personal factors that potentially
influence officers’ career decisions. The SOC will also provide a rich longitudinal database for
examining the Army experience from a long-term perspective.

Findings from the 1996 SOC were distributed in four short topical papers over a one-year
period. These papers focused on officers’ attitudes at the time of the survey and addressed issues
of interest to a variety of Army agencies. This report is a compendium of those papers. Trend
analyses comparing LROC and SOC findings will be the subjects of future reports.

EDGAR M. SOHNSON ©
Director



86 404 91 aynNsSU] Youeasey Auuy *s'n (908) si9a1e9 4991439 UO
8 99140 Aaning jouuosieg Ay A@AINS 966} OU} WO. Beq

GALLININODS ATHDIH DNISE

1HOd3yY OL SA 1VINSS NVHL

A14yI1 SHOW ATLNVOISINDIS @
JYV SY30Id40 3 1VIN

AINHYY SHL OL GS.LLININOD
ATHDIH ONISE LYOdsay
(39vY 4O SSAI10YV)D3y) «a
SYHS0ISAO SSO LNOE

INAWLININOD TWNOILVZINVDYO Woy



86 92e4 91 aimpsu yoseesey Away *s'h (908) s1981e9 489130 UO
L 20190 Aeaing jauuosieg Auy Aaaing 966}. 843 wos eeq

é4apusab 10 punosbyoeq
d1uyjye/jeloe1 UO paseq ‘S1BDIJJO Jo
sapn}ije oy} Ul SPOUdJOJJIP a10U} ay <a

syed
bLYO bb
soruvdsipyy | —%S
%S

so[eulay
wl

sdnoJ5 JOpUdy pul jeloey



86 494 91 anNSu] yYoseasay Awy “s"f) (908) siaaue: ‘D 1991O UO
on 90109 Aaning jauUuosieg Auuy ASAINS 966} Ou) Woy eeq

INAWSYILAd
TINA AVLS THM AAHL LYOdsY
Ol ATAyIT LSOW SHV SY39ISAO
JIVIN GNV SHS0ISssd0 WOV1E

LNALNI dasaedVO



ARMY LIFE

i Strongly disagree

[ Disagree

57. Please use the following scale to indicate your level of [ Neither agree nor disagree
agreement with the following statements. [ Agree

MARK A RESPONSE FOR EACH. [ Strongly agree |

H

i

Civilians are more likely to share my values and beliefs than other officers. ee)

An Army career would allow/allows me to attain the standard of living | want for myself/my family.
One of the things ! value most about the Army is the sense of community or camaraderie | feel.

An Army career would/does create a lot of conflict between my work and my family life.

] would rather be affiliated with the Army than any civilian organization | know of.

An Army career would allow/allows me to maintain the kind of balance | want between my work and
personal life.

Even if | had an offer of a bit more pay from a civilian organization, | would be reluctant to leave the Army.

| would discourage a close friend from joining the Army.
The demands of an Army career would/does make it difficult to have the kind of family life | would like.

| can count on Army people to help out when needed.

| frequently feel like leaving the Army.

f am quite proud to tell people that | am in the Army. _

| feel | am really a-part of the Army organization.

For me, a rewarding career can compensate for limited personal/family time.
| can get ahead in the Army doing the kinds of work | like best. ,

An Amy career would allow/allows me to provide my family with the opportunities and experiences | think
are most important.

ee
388
O|OjO}
eee
eee)
eee
siete
eee
eee
eee
IO|O|O}
eee
eee
ee)

O_O O O O O O OO OO O 0 O00 0

QO O O O O O O OO OO OO 0 OO

l Extremely dissatisfied

I Dissatisfied

58. Please use the scale below to indicate your overall level of [ Neutral or mixed feelings
satisfaction with the following aspects of Army life at the [ Satisfied
present time. = Extremely satisfied

How satisfied are you with...
MARK A RESPONSE FOR EACH.

personal and family life?
life as an officer?
support received from branch assignment officer(s)?

time available to pursue personal life goals?
‘relationships with superior/senior officers? .
‘elationships with peers?

‘telationships with subordinates?

OOOO OOO
OO00 O00
OOOO O00
(olelelommerele)

1996 SOC - 11 =a



% Who are Satisfied with Pay

&
&
S
€
=
3
2
3
z
Fi
°
§
H
2
5
®

BLACK HISPANIC WHITE MALES FEMALES.
OFFICERS OFFICERS OFFICERS

SEoW9% © SEaWS% — SE=W1% SE=W%

SEI

Figure 7. Satisfaction with Pay

100%

on

FEMALES

BLACK HISPANIC WHITE MALES

OFFICERS OFFICERS OFFICERS

SE=W4% — SEWO% = SESW. SEaWI% © SEDAAO%

Figure 8. Satisfaction with Family Issues

Met Between Expectations and Duties.
Figure 9 shows the degree of fit officers
experienced between their initial expectations
and their actual branch duties. Fewer female
officers than male officers and fewer Hispanic
officers than Black or White officers reported
that their duties were a close or very close fit
with their initial expectations of their branch
duties.

15

100%

% With High Degree of Fit

MALES

BLACK HISPANIC WHITE FEMALES

OFFICERS OFFICERS OFFICERS

SEw9% © SEWSK — SEEWI% SEaW% = SEWO%

Figure 9. Match of Career Expectations and
Duties

Command Opportunities. Figure 10
depicts officers’ perceptions of command
opportunities within their branches. About
three out of four Black (73%) and White (74%)
officers reported that their opportunities for
command were good, very good, or excellent
compared to Hispanic officers (67%) who were
less likely to report good, very good, or
excellent command opportunities.

Female officers (72%) were as likely as
their male counterparts (73%) to report that
their command opportunities were good, very
good, or excellent.

3

3
é
e
2
© 20%
€
s
g
B om
é BLACK HISPANIC WHITE MALES FEMALES
x OFFICERS OFFICERS OFFICERS
woe Sen sete seuiim sean

Figure 10. Current Branch Command
Opportunities



MARKING INSTRUCTIONS. ae

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

* Please use a No. 2 pencil.

USE NO. 2 PENCIL ONLY
SS

* Make heavy black marks that fill the circle for your

answer.
* Please do not make stray marks of any kind.

CORRECT MARK

ome Ke)

INCORRECT MARKS

OC)

Marking numbers.

Sometimes you will be asked to give numbers for your
answer by filling in a grid. If you are asked to give numbers,
please record the numbers in the boxes at the left of the grid.
then fill in the circles of the arid as shown below.

EXAMPLE:
What year did you complete the most
recent course/school you identified
above?

jarking:all:that apply

Sometimes you will be asked to “MARK ALL THAT
APPLY.” When this instruction appears, you may mark
more than one answer.

EXAMPLE:
Did you participate in the Junior Reserve Officer
Training Program (JROTC) during high school?
ON, there was no JROTC program at my high
school.
ONo, t did not participate in JROTC in high school.
@ Yes, | participated in JROTC during the following
grades: MARK ALL THAT APPLY.
O 9th grade @ 11th grade
© 10th grade @ 12th grade

194
3 OOGO@OODOSOS

Selecting-only:one response *<

Sometimes you will be asked to mark one response from a
list of possible items.

EXAMPLE:
For that most recent course/school identified above,
would you say you received it... MARK ONE.

O too early in your career?
@ at about the right time in your career?
O too late in your career?

‘Using a common scale for mi

than one question

Sometimes you will be asked to “MARK A RESPONSE FOR EACH" to answer a number of different questions.

EXAMPLE:

To what extent did the most recent course/school

you have completed ...
MARK A RESPONSE FOR EACH.

prepare you for successful leadership?
contribute toward your professional development?
instill Army values?

prepare you to perform your current duties?
prepare you to perform your current leader tasks?
prepare you for your future assignments?

[No basis to judge |

H Not at all
Slight extent

Moderate extent |

Great extent

Very great extent

lOO @00
IOOO OOO

1996 SOC -3

wees

wort



5. Summary and Discussion

a.

Key Findings. Type of branch
assignment was not related to the career
expectations of company grade officers, except
that CA officers were significantly more likely
than CS or CSS officers to rate their
opportunities for command as very good or
excellent. And although officers generally
perceived a career in the Army as desirable,
they were not especially optimistic about their
chances of implementing such a career.
Officers rated their expected length of career
as shorter than their desired length of career
and also reported themselves as considerably
less satisfied with their career prospects than
they were satisfied with their current
assignments or their lives as officers.

There also were statistically significant
differences among officers by source of
commission, racial/ethnic background, and
gender with respect to attitudes toward
training, branch satisfaction, career intent,
organizational commitment, and various
aspects of their jobs. For example, USMA
graduates rated their pre-commissioning
training more highly than did the graduates of
the ROTC scholarship program or the ROTC
non-scholarship program, and more USMA
graduates reported satisfaction with their
branches than did graduates of the other two
programs. USMA graduates were least likely
to report intent to stay in the Army for 20
years or until retirement than were the ROTC
scholarship or non-scholarship groups. This
lower level of career intent was related to the
USMA graduates’ expectations of an easier
transition to civilian life and to their
perceptions that benefits, career opportunities
and family life would be better in the civilian
sector.

Although high levels of organizational
commitment did not vary across racial/ethnic
(White, Black, Hispanic) groups, Black

17

officers were more likely than White or
Hispanic officers to report their intent to stay
in the Army for 20 years or until retirement.
Female officers, on the other hand, reported
both a lower level of organizational
commitment and a lower level of career intent
than did male officers.

There also were some differences among
groups with respect to dimensions of job
satisfaction (supervisors, promotions, work
itself, co-workers, pay, and family issues),
with Black officers indicating greater
satisfaction on five of the six dimensions and
female officers reporting less satisfaction with
family issues and more satisfaction with pay
than male officers.

Implications. Some of the findings
described in this report have implications for
Army management. For example, if the lower
level of career intent for USMA graduates
actually results in more of those officers
leaving the Army prematurely, what can the
Army do to increase retention of such officers,
assuming it wishes to do so? As women
officers demonstrated lower levels of career
intent, what can be done to increase their
retention—again assuming that this is a
desirable outcome? Because response patterns
for both male and female officers indicated
that those holding the most unfavorable views
of the Army (e.g., concerning the promotion
system and downsizing) were most likely to
intend to leave the Army, what can be done to

change such attitudes?



Listed on this page are some of the factors officers may
consider when making career decisions.

59. Please use the scale below to indicate the
importance of these factors to your career

60.

Fill in the circle with the item number of the =:
first most important factor. MARK ONLY ONE.
D@OOQOOODOOO®
Q@0GOGGOOOOOO®

decision. 61. Fill in the circle with the item number of the
MARK A RESPONSE FOR EACH. second most important factor.
[_Unimportant (not a factor at all MARK ONLY ONE.
Somewhat important O@OOOOOOOO®D
I Important @QQGGOOOOOOO
[ Very important
Extremely important 62. Fill in the circle with the item number of the
third most important factor. MARK ONLY ONE.
1, Pay eeeee O@OOQOQOODOOO®
2. Retirement benefits @e eee (EXCIOIGIO LOO LOLOL)
8. Benefits other than retirement
(eg., medical, PX) eeeee CIVILIAN ALTERNATIVES
4. Assistance for civilian graduate 7
education IOIO|O|C|O} 63. Please use the scale below to indicate how you
5. Overall standard of living in theAmy |OIO|IO|O|O perceive conditions in the military compared with
6. Opportunities to advance in your conditions in a civilian job you could realistically
chosen field IOICIO|IOIO expect to get. MARK A RESPONSE FOR EACH.
7. Opportunities for job satisfaction IOIOIO|OO} Don’t know
8. Quality of co-workers @eeeee | Much better in civilian life
9. Your feelings about the organization [Somewhat better in civilian life
mission/goals IOICIOIO\O} [ ‘About the same
10. Working hours/schedule ereeee Ec ‘Somewhat better in Army
11. Employment/educational opportunities Much better in Army
for spouse eee ee)
12. Spouse's overall satisfaction lOICIC|IO|O 1. Pay IOIOIOIO|O|O}
13. Quality of child care/schools/youth 2. Retirement benefits eee ee
facilities IOIO|O|O!O} 3. Benefits other than retirement IOIOIOICIO|O}
14. Time for personal/family life IOIO|OIC|O) 4. Assistance for civilian graduate
15. Length of matemity/patemity leave education O@Oeeee
available IO|OIO|O!O} 5. Overall standard of living IO|OIO|O|O\O}
16. Overall quality of life in military IOIOIO|O'O} 6. Opportunities to advance in your
17. Level of integrity in the organization IOIO|O|IO|O) chosen field Oe @ eee
7. Opportunities for job satisfaction Oe eee
18. Level of professionalism in the 8. Quality of co-workers IO|OIC]O|O\O}
organization IOIO|OIC|O} 9. Your feelings about the organization
19. Personal freedom eee ee mission/goals ICDIO|O|OIC!O}
20. Job security IOlIOIOjO|C} 10. Working hours/schedule IO|OIOIO\O\C}
21. Total family income IOIOIO|O|O} 11. Employment/educational opportunities
for spouse \eeeeee
22. Civilian job alternatives available to you (OIOIOIO|O 12. Spouse's overall satisfaction \@)(@),@).@)'0)e)
13. Quality of child care/schools/youth
facilities IO|O|OIOIC|O}
TOP 3 FACTORS: In responding to the next 3 questions 7
(60, 61 and 62), please select the three factors from 1-22 14. Time for personal/family life @Ceeeee
in Question 59 above that are most critical to your own 15. Length of materity/paternity leave
decision about staying in or leaving the Army. available . eee ee
Please select only one response for each of the 16. Overall quality of life @eeeoe
following questions. 17. Level of integrity in the organization COIOIO|IOIO|O}
18. Level of professionalism in the
organization (exe ee ee)
19. Personal freedom IO}O|O|O|O|O}
20. Job security eeoeee
21. Total family income Se eee
an 1996 SOC - 12 an



Summary. Overall, the majority of Army
officers (68%) intended to stay in the Army for
20 years or longer. Differences by
commissioning source in the intention to
remain in the Army showed that OCS officers
were most likely and USMA officers were least
likely to intend to remain until retirement. (A
more thorough investigation of these
differences was explored in Section 2 of this
report.)

Rank, educational attainment, and
perceived civilian job opportunities were also
found to be significant factors associated with
intent to stay until retirement.

Compared to White and Hispanic officers,
Black officers were significantly more likely to
report an intent to remain until retirement and
male officers were significantly more likely
than female officers to report that they intended
to stay until retirement.

12



96 494 91 9yNWSU] YOeasey Auy "S'N (908) s190729 199130 UO
zz a91HO Aaaing jauuosieg Awiy A@AINS 966} BY} Woy e}eEG
SA1IVWWad = =SFIVIN SOINVdSIH S-OV1d SSLIHM
ME-+=AS %I1-/+=AS %S-I+=aS ME-/+=AS MV-=AS

%0

r %02

0b

F %09

WiLL WL

%08

HOIOHD LSA SVM HONVaYE INAS ___ | sor

~ ALIIWSY GNV SNOILVLO3dxa \



86 4e4 OL aIMpsu yoJeasey Auy *s'N (90S) s1981e9 199130 UO
6 2010 Aaning jauuosiag Awy Asaing 966} 9u} Woy eG

SAWWsaad SHATVIN SOINVdSIH SWOV1E SALIHM

LNAWLININOD TWNOILVZINVSdO



96 4e4 91 en su] Yoseesey AWAY ‘S'N (90S) S190189 1891)}0 UO
ot 8010 Aeving jeuuosieg Awy A®@AINS 966} OU) WO. B}eQ

Asea Aiaa/Aseo aq
PINOM OJ1| ULIJIAID O} UOI}ISULJ)] SADIJOG O}
pue ‘ayi| Aveyjiu ueUy
Ajybiy a10w Sjl] UBIIAID JO S}Oedse 9}e1 0}

""" AJOYI| JSC9] Bie SIBOIJO
diysiejoy9S-UON DLO <n

“* Ajowil
}SOW 31e SIVIDIPIO VWINSN <u

357 AYVLITIN SA NVIMAID



Among individual CA branches, Infantry
officers (67%) were most likely to report
command opportunities were very good or
excellent while Aviation officers (48%) were
least likely to do so.

Among CS branches, Military Police
(64%) were most likely to be positive about
their command opportunities while Chemical
Corps officers (7%) and Military Intelligence
officers (13%) were least likely to be positive.

Among CSS branches, Transportation
Corps officers (60%) were most likely to be
positive about command opportunities while
Adjutant General Corps officers (23%) were
least likely to be positive.

100%

son BiExcellenvVery Good
BLimited/Very Limited

cA cs css
SE=W2% SEI SEWI%

Figure 4. Command Opportunities

Advancement Opportunities. CSS officers
(67%) were significantly more likely than
officers in CA (61%) or CS (60%) branches to
report that the chances for advancement within
their branches were very good or excellent
(Figure 5).

Among individual CA branches, Engineer
officers (65%) were most likely to report their
chances for advancement were very good or
excellent while Air Defense Artillery officers
(51%) were least likely to do so.

Within CS branches, Military Police (65%)
were most likely to be positive about
advancement opportunities and Chemical
Corps (46%) officers were least likely to be
positive.

Among CSS branches, Transportation
Corps officers (75%) were most likely to be
positive and Ordnance officers (61%) were
least likely to be positive.

100%

BExcellentWVery Good

cA cs css
SE=W-2% SEWo% SEW 9%

Figure 5. Advancement Opportunities

Satisfaction with the Army. Another
indicator of career expectations is satisfaction
with the Army. The SOC contains measures of
satisfaction with a variety of facets of Army
life including satisfaction with current
assignment, life as an Army officer, and career
prospects. Figure 6 shows that there were
virtually no differences by type of branch for
any of these three items. The majority of all
officers were satisfied or very satisfied with
both their current assignment (ranging from
67% to 72%) and with life as an officer
(ranging from 76% to 78%). While there were
no differences by type of branch, significantly
fewer officers reported satisfaction with career
prospects in the Army (ranging from 53% to
57%) than satisfaction with current assignment
or for life as an officer.



44. If affordable, decent housing were available
both on post and off post, | would generally
prefer to live...

Oon post.
O off post.

eo Somer

-—
36. How many hours per week (on average) do you 45. Given the nature of the work in your current -
usually work in your current assignment? assignment, how often do the following occur? =
Not at
Hours OD@DOODOOOOO ai ine j
Per Week OO®OQ@OQOQOOO® Routines vary ata moment's notice OOQOOOOO mm =
You are able to risk doing things -=
37. How many hours per week (on average) differently OO0O0C0C0CO =
would you like to work on your job? =
‘ : Changes occur gradually OOOO0O00O0. =
Hours OD®@O@OOOOO® Precise instructions for most tasks -
Like to OOQOOOOOOO . are provided OOOCOCO00O =
Decisions that you make must have -=
38. Under normal circumstances, what is the novel approaches OO0O0O000 =
highest number of hours that you might You are able to influence changes -=
be asked to work in a week on your job? in policies and procedures OOO0O0O000O m=
You are able to make decisions -_
Highest OD@OOOOOO® , independently OOCO0000 =
No. of Hrs.” MOOGOOOOOOO -
-
39. How common is it for the number of hours 46. How satisfied are you with... =
you work per week to vary on this job? MARK A RESPONSE FOR EACH. -=
O Very common =
© Somewhat common i Very dissatisfied -
Odard to say [ Dissatisfied -
© Somewhat uncommon [Neither satistied nor dissatisfied -=
© Very uncommon [ Satisfied -
Very satisfied -=
Please complete the next five questions with the =
response that is most true for you. your current assignment? IOIO|O|O|O}
the quality of supervision you receive in -
40. Most important to my personal pride is... your current assignment? @eeeem
Onmy service to the Army and the U.S. as a soldier. -
Onmy technical/professional skills. the kinds of assignments you have had? [OIO|IO|IO|O| =
the quality of information you have -=
41. When | think of myself as a professional, | received about Army career options? [O|O|IO|O|IO) ==
compare myself most often with ... opportunities for informal contacts with =
O Army leaders whom | know and respect. superiors/senior officers? eeeeem.!
O those who are respected in my technical/career your current compensation (pay, -=
field, whether or not they are in the Army. allowances. benefits, etc.)? @®eceeeom.)
the respect and recognition given to -
42. The kind of work I enjoy most is available . .. Officers in your career field? eoceenk..
O only in the military. =
Oprimarily in the military. social relations with peers? @eecem.!
O equally in the military and civilian world. -
O primarily in the civilian world. . your current job? ee) iO] ==
O only in the civilian world. -=
your career prospects in the Army? OID} iO] =
43. Is there affordable, decent housing available at . =
your current location—either on or off post? your chances of being promoted? ee iO; =
MARK ALL THAT APPLY. the selection rates for promotion to the -
O Yes, on post next higher rank? @eecem.)
O Yes, off post the amount of time it takes to be -
ONo selected for promotion to the next -
higher rank? eeecem.)
=
-=
-
*
=
-
-
=

1996S0C-9 a.



86 4e4 91 eIMmpsu] yYosewasey Awuy *S‘*N (90S) S190se9 199130 UO
L 9010 Aeasng jouuosiag Awiy ABAing 966} Oy} Woy Beq

sioyew-Adijod SuWuojul
pue senssi Aey sossoippe
JEU] S1991L9 JBDIJO
uo eJep AdAINS 1D9||OD

“"""ASOdudNd

GNNOYSDNOVaG



86 994 91 e@insu] yoseasay Awuy “sn . (908) s1981e9 199130 UO
€ 39010 Aaning jouuosieg Auy Aaaing 966} 8y) Wo. ByeQ

SJOP|OYUSye}]s 0} SAISUOdSDY--
sonss! Ao1jod uo snoo,--
jap [PIUYIS} [EWIUI|--

JEWIOJ 19}}8|SMON--

SLYOd4Y 1VOIdOL @

SLINSSAY AO SONISFSIYE @

SLONGOUd



86 494 OL 3NWSU] Yoseasay Auy ‘S"N (908) s18a81e5 109130 UO
p 9910 Againg jouuOsieg Awy Adaing 966} 84} Wo. BEG

Autiy ay} YyyIM
UJBEUIDY O}] SUOIUBJU] S1BIIJO JO SIsAjeuy »#%

sdnoJj5) Japuat) pue jeioey Buowy Auiy
84} PABMOL SAPNIY Ul SadUasajiqg Jo sisAjeuy »%

juawubissy
youelg jo adh Aq suojejoadxy saa1e9

aa4nog Bujuolssiuuiog Aq sapnyiy 492JO »%

sIQUIIEAY MON SHOday jesido,

~SLONGOud ~~



[ Has not happened yet =
= planning on a civilian career.
[ leaning towards a civilian career. |"
18. Please use the following scale to indicate (to the [ undecided.
best of your recollection) how you felt at the time [ leaning towards an Army career.
of each event/experience described below. [ planning on an Army career.

When ! began pre-commissioning training (e.g., USMA, ROTC, OCS), Iwas...
At the time | received my commission, | was .. .
After my first leadership assignment (e.g., platoon leader), twas... ~

After my first staff-type assignment, | was . . .

At the end of the Advanced Course, | was . . .

After my first company command assignment, | was . . .
Right nowlam...

OUR BRANCH AND FUNCTIONA

19. In COLUMN A below, indicate the basic branch in which you were commissioned. MARK ONE.
20. In COLUMN B below, indicate your current branch -(not detailed to). MARK ONE.
21. In COLUMN C below, indicate the branch you would like to be in (if you could choose any ONE branch).
22. Are you currently detailed to a branch other than your basic branch?
O Yes—in COLUMN D below, indicate the branch to which you are currently detailed. MARK ONE.
ONo—GO TO QUESTION 23 ON PAGE 7.

COL.A COL.B COL. Cc cOL.D

COMBAT ARMS Originally Commissioned Current Branch Would Like To Be In Currently Detailed to

11—Infantry (IN)
12—Armor (AR)
13—Field Artillery (FA)

14—Air Defense Artillery (AD)
15—Aviation (AV)

18—Special Forces (SF)
21—Corps of Engineers (COE)

©9000 O00
OC0O0 O00
OC0O OOO

COMBAT SUPPORT
25—Signal Corps (SC)
31—Military Police Corps (MP)
35—Military Intelligence (MI)
74—Chemical Corps (CM)

©0000 O000 OOO

0000
0000

COMBAT SERVICE SUPPORT
42—Adjutant General's Corps (AG)
44—Finance Corps (FC)
88—Transportation Corps (TC)

CO OOO

91—Ordnance Corps (OD)
92—Quartermaster Corps (QM)

00 COO 0000

©O OOO
OO OOO

SPECIAL BRANCHES

55—Judge Advocate General's Corps (JA)
56—Chaplain (CH)

60-62—Medical Corps (MC)

63—Dental Corps (DC)

64—Veterinary Corps (VC)

65—Amny Medical Specialist Corps (AM)
66—Army Nurse Corps (AN)
67—Medica! Service Corps (MS)

O00 0000
O000 O00O
©000 OOOO

O000 OOOO

1996 SOC -6



86 924 91 aynNsuy Yoweesay Ay “s‘N (208) s188189 499130 UO
th 8010 Aaning jauUuosieg Auy ASAINg 966} 24} WoL BEG

(%rr) AVWd-

HLIM GsalseSILVS 34 OL ATAMIT
AYOW 3YV SYHADISAO FIVINAS

(%Lb) SANSSI ATIINV4--
HLIM G3ISSILVS 39 OL A1SyIN



Introduction
a

The U. S. Army Research Institute has been collecting information on officer attitudes on a
number of topics and issues of importance to both Army leadership and the officer corps. The
effort began with the administration of the Longitudinal Research on Officer Careers (LROC)
survey from 1988 to 1992 and continues with the Survey on Officer Careers (SOC). The SOC
was fielded for the first time in 1996 and will be conducted on a biennial basis.

The 1996 SOC was mailed to a random sample of officers stratified by rank and source of
commission. Minority and female officers were over-sampled to allow the survey results to be
compared by both race and gender with a sampling error of +5% or less. Over 10,000 officers
responded to the 1996 SOC. The longitudinal sample comprises approximately 500 officers
who responded to at least one of the four versions of the LROC project and also responded to
the SOC.

The SOC is a compilation of a large number of the original LROC items and a group of new
items, some of which have been used in other Army survey instruments (a copy of the 1996
SOC is at Appendix A). The SOC covers a variety of issues, including leader development,
current assignment, Army life, Army life expectations, family matters, and current events.
Items found to be useful as composites or scales include: satisfaction with supervision, with
peers, with promotions, and with work; tolerance of military demands; civilian vs. Army
standard of living; civilian market ease of entry; characteristics of the job; organizational
commitment; and retention propensity.

A key goal in analyzing the 1996 SOC data was to ensure that findings from the survey
were available in a timely fashion to both policy makers and the officer corps. To that end, four
short topical papers were published. These papers focused on officers' attitudes at the time of
the survey and addressed issues of interest to a variety of Army agencies. Topics included: (1)
officers' career expectations by type of branch assignment, (2) officers’ attitudes by
commissioning source, (3) officers’ intentions to remain in the Army, and (4) differences in
officers’ attitudes toward the Army among racial and gender groups. These short papers, which
addressed selected topics from the survey, were published over a one-year period and were
disseminated to Army staff and members of the officer corps by request. The purpose of this
Study Report is to offer a compendium of those papers in a published report for a wider
audience.

Future plans include trend analyses for a number of the items in the survey, survival
analyses (how officers who stay in the Army differ from those who leave), and briefings or
reports in response to specific requests of Army leaders. Current reports and briefings will be
updated with results from the 1998 SOC and future SOC surveys.

For additional information on the SOC program, contact June Taylor Jones, Survey
Statistician, Army Personnel Survey Office, 703-617-7807, ionesi@ ari.army.mil.



Table of Contents

Introduction 1
1. Career Expectations by Type of Branch Assignment 2
2. Officer Attitudes by Commissioning Source 6
3. Analysis of Officers' Intentions to Remain in the Army 10

4. Analysis of Differences in Attitudes Toward the Army Among

Racial and Gender Groups 13
5. Summary and Discussion 17
Appendix A. 1996 Survey on Officer Careers A-1

Appendix B. Briefing Charts for Officer Attitudes by Commissioning Source B-1

Appendix C. Briefing Charts for Differences in Attitudes Toward the
Army Among Racial and Gender Groups C-1

vii



4. Differences in Attitudes Toward the Army
Among Racial and Gender Groups’

Background: Attitudes towards and
perceptions of the Army were analyzed to
determine whether there were differences 1008
among White, Black, and Hispanic officers—
as well as between male and female officers—
in terms of their commitment to and intention
to remain in the Army. Understanding such
differences can assist policy makers in
managing retention and maintaining necessary
staffing levels within the officer corps.

2

% Highly Committed

3

Focus: This section of the report focuses on BLACK HISPANIC WHITE MALES FEMALES
whether there are differences in attitudes and ee meee seoure — seeuan
career intent based on race, ethnicity, and/or
gender. Figure 1. Organizational Commitment
Findings: Organizational Commitment.
Organizational commitment is assessed by a
composite of items asking officers such things
as whether they are proud to say they are in the
Army, would be reluctant to leave for a
civilian job, enjoy the Army community, and
would rather be affiliated with the Army than
in a civilian job. High scores for the
composite indicate high levels of commitment.

Career Intent. Figure 2 shows
percentages for each group who reported that
they intend to stay in the Army for 20 or more
years or until retirement. Relative to White
and Hispanic officers, Black officers are
significantly more likely to report an intent to
remain in the Army. Female officers are
significantly less likely than male officers to
report an intent remain in the Army.

There were no statistically significant
differences by race or ethnicity in the
percentages of officers reporting a high level
of commitment to the Army (61% of White
and Black officers and 65% of Hispanic
officers—Figure 1). However, there was a
Statistically significant difference between
genders with female officers being
significantly less likely than male officers to
report a high level of commitment to the
Army.

R s 3 a

% Who Intend to Remain Long-Term
a

Fy

BLACK HISPANIC WHITE MALES FEMALES
OFFICERS OFFICERS OFFICERS
SE=vI% — SEW-S% SEWN SEaw1% — SEWI%

1See Appendix C—Briefing on Differences in Attitudes

Toward the Army Among Racial and Gender Groups. Figure 2. Propensity to Remain in the Army

13



CA branches.” Infantry officers were most
likely to desire (80%) and expect (69%) to
serve at least until retirement, while Engineer
officers were least likely to desire (72%) and
expect (55%) to do so.

Current Career Intent: There were two
additional items on the SOC that dealt directly
with career expectations. The first of these
items asked the respondents to rate, at the time
they completed the survey, whether they were
planning or leaning toward an Army career,
were undecided, or were planning or leaning
toward a civilian career.

There were no differences by type of
branch in reporting career plans. About three
out of five officers (ranging from 58% to 60%)
reported that they were planning or leaning
toward a career in the Army (Figure 2).

There were no significant differences
among individual CS or CSS branches. Among
the CA branches, Infantry officers (64%) were
most likely to report they planned an Army
career while Air Defense Artillery officers
(52%) were least likely to do so.

100% Plan Army Career
Plan Civilian Career

59% 58%

ow

cs css
SE=W-2% SEwo% SE=w9%

Figure 2. Planning an Army vs. Civilian Career

? There are too few respondents from the Special Forces (n=74)
and Finance Corps (n=93) to include them in the analyses of
individual branches.

The second career intent item (Figure 3)
asked respondents to rate their individual career
intentions on a scale of “1: I plan to stay
beyond 20 years,” to “6: I will definitely leave
upon completion of my obligation.” As with
the previous career intent item, there were
virtually no differences by type of branch with
over half (ranging from 54% to 58%) of all
company grade officers reporting that they
intended to stay until retirement or beyond.

Among the individual CA branches,
Infantry officers (63%) were most likely to
report that they intended to stay at least until
retirement while Engineer officers (47%) were
least likely to do so.

109%

Stay to Retirements

cA cs css
SEawm SEowo% SE=Wa%

Figure 3. Current Career Intent

Command Opportunities. In the Army’s
promotion system, having the opportunity to
command tends to increase an individual’s
competitiveness for promotion and thereby
continuation in service. Perceptions of
opportunities to command in an individual’s
current branch varied significantly by type of
branch (Figure 4). Company grade officers in
CA branches (59%) were significantly more
likely than CS (30%) or CSS (51%) officers to
report that opportunities for command in their
branches were very good or excellent.



86 994 91 @nyWSU] Yseesay Awuy ‘s'N (90S) s4998129 19910 UO
€& 3010 Aaaing jauUuosieg Auy ASAing 966} 8u} Wo. Beg

LN3T1S9X4/d009
AdAA/GOOD 3eV HONVYE YISHL NI
SAILINNLYOddO LNAINADNVAGV SASI1SaE--

SYOSIAYUAdNS HLIM GAIASILVS 3YV--

(WAGNAD WO AOVA AO SSHTGUVIAW
SUAVIMAO TIV AO ALIMOLVI AHL

\

a



86 404 91 aNNsu] Yoeesey Awsy *S'N (90S) s19287e5 189130 UO
OL 8010 Aeaing jauuosieg Auiy Aaaing 966} Ou} Wo. BBG

SAILNG HONVdd IVALOV GNV
SNOILVLOAdXSA TVILINI NSSAMLA9
Lid ASOD AUSA/ASOTO V LHOdsd
OL ATS LSVS1 AV SHsS0IsAO
J IVINAA GNV Sds0iesd0 DINVdSIH

ALITW4ua GNV SNOILVLOAdxXS



86 494 91 ansuy yoseasey Awy “sn
6h 9010 Aaning jauuosieg Awy

SAIVWad SAVIN

%E-H+=AS %V-I+=aS %S-I+=AS bE-/+=AS

%L9
‘eed %EL bl

6youesg anod Ul puevului0s
IO} Santuny.10ddo 9y} 318 poos MoH

SOINVdSIH SxOV1d

(208) s1991e5 189130 UO
Aaaing 966} 84} Woy Beq

WEL

SAILINNLYOddO GNVININOD

SALIHM

%I1-+=AS

r %0

r %0e

+ %0b

+ %09

%0B

~ %00b

yuay]aoxe/poos A1aa/poos 8un10da1 9%



SURVEY APPROVAL AUTHORITY: U.S. ARMY RESEARCH INSTITUTE
FOR THE BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES
SURVEY CONTROL NUMBER: PERI-AO-96-9
RCS: MILPC-3

i

SURVEY
ON
OFFICER
: CAREERS

o

1996

+ U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE:1996-86-702/00036

DAFORM 7125, APR96 REPLACES DA FORM 7125, MAR 96, WHICH IS OBSOLETE.
= 22 ; =



Findings from the Survey on Officer
Careers -- 1996

Human Resources Research Organization

June T. Jones
U.S. Army Research Institute

United States Army Research Institute
for the Behavioral and Social Sciences

August 1999

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

yr evar ace 19991109 003



96 494 OL aynyWsuj Yoseasay Auuy “s'n (20S) sideseg 499139 UO
0z 2891YO Asaing jouUOsJeg Ay Adaing 966} 243 WO. eeq
A 1V WAS Vv | Vd
Sas SAIN SOINY A SIH ies Seite

%0

Se

dt %0s

ea; %SL

yuat[a0xo/poo8 A19A/poos Suns0dai %

9
%LB %88 78 %68 %LB

épey savy nod syusUIUSISse JO Sod} dy) peY Sey
OYA JUOIUIOS IOJ YOuBAG INOA UI JUSUISIUBA Pe
1OJ santuny.10ddo ay} aie poos Moy

SAILINNLYOddO LNANSONVAGV



96 404 91 e@]NSU] YOeeseY AuUYy *S'N (90S) Siees2D 199130 UO
Zz 20150 AeAing jeuuosieg Auy AGAANS 966} 84) WO’ BEG

2661 pue ‘OGE “6861 ‘8861 U! pe}OnpUuod

Adains (9OH'1) ss901e9
JOD1IJJO UO YDJeSSoY jJeulpnybuo7] @

BHuluies} Huluoissimwos-aid
puke JUSWI}IWILWOD 199189 UO pasndo-
SSB[D OSG} 10) JUBUIdOJaASp 1991eD

(2864-0861) SNE}01g Peloid @
VINSN Ul UBWOM Jo }OedWI! psipnis
(0861-9261) eusury alold @

aNnowo»ova



Background: Army officers are commissioned
through several sources including Reserve
Officer Training Corps (ROTC) graduates;
graduates from the U.S. Military Academy
(USMA); Officer Candidate School (OCS),
which promotes enlisted soldiers into the officer
corps; and direct commissioning for officers
entering Army occupations in the professional
(doctors, attorneys, etc.), technical (warrant
officers), or scientific arenas.

Over the past few years, several studies have
focused on the costs of producing officers
through the service academies compared to the
ROTC or OCS programs. At issue is whether
the academies and, to a lesser extent, ROTC
scholarship programs are “worth” their relatively
high price tags.” How long officers stay in the
Army and their attitudes and experiences are of
interest in this debate.

Many factors, including officers’ attitudes
and career intentions, are germane to this issue.
Attitudes are important to consider, given their

2. Officer Attitudes by Commissioning Source’

relationship to performance and behavior in
general. If there are differences in officer attitudes
based on their source of commission, what do
these differences imply about future performance
and behavior?

Focus: This section of the report is based ona
subset of approximately 8,000 officers who were
commissioned into the Army through ROTC or
USMA (officers who received their commission
through direct appointment or through Officer
Candidate School were not included). Analyses
compare attitudes and career intentions by source
of commission.

Findings: In rating pre-commissioning military

training (Table 1), USMA graduates were most

likely—and ROTC non-scholarship officers least

likely—to agree that their training prepared them

e for subsequent training at their officer basic
course,

© to conduct oral presentations and briefings,

¢ to write memos and short reports, and

© to be an effective officer.

Table 1. Effectiveness of Pre-Commissioning Training

% of Officers Who Agree/Strongly Agree ROTC-S ROTC-NS
(scholarship) (non-scholarship) USMA.
My pre-commissioning military training SE=+/-2% SE=+/-2% SE=+/-2%
(USMA, ROTC, OCS) prepared me to...
e master the requirements of my
Branch Basic Course 58% 53% 81%
© conduct oral presentations and briefings 69% 61% 95%
© write memos and short reports 55% 45% 89%
¢ be aneffective officer 78% 73% 95%

1 See Appendix B--Briefing on Officer Attitudes by Commissioning Source.
2 argetsinger, A. (1997, August 12). Academies Stir Some Doubts, Some Salutes. The Washington Post, pp. Al, A13.



Within the individual branches there were
no differences in satisfaction with current
assignment or life as an officer. However, for
CA branches and CSS branches there were
differences in satisfaction with career
prospects.

Within the CA branches, Infantry officers
(60%) were most likely to be satisfied with
career prospects and Air Defense Artillery
officers (47%) were least likely to be satisfied.

Within CSS branches, Adjutant General
Corps officers (67%) were most likely to be
satisfied with career prospects while
Transportation Corps officers (50%) were least
likely to be satisfied.

100% GCA Genv-2%)
BCS (6e=4/.3%)

DCSS (se=4/3%)

son 18% 16% 16%

ond

Current Assignment —_Life as an Officer Career Pros pects
SEaw2% SE=W3% SEow%

Figure 6. Satisfaction Levels

Summary: Type of current branch assignment
does not appear to have an influence on the
career expectations of most company grade
officers. Only one item resulted in a significant
difference by branch type: Company grade
officers in CA were significantly more likely
than CS or CSS officers to rate their
opportunities for command as very good or
excellent.

For the remaining items, there were no
differences based on type of branch
assignment. In summary:

© 76% of all company grade officers would
have liked to serve at least 20 years

© 61% were planning or leaning toward an
Army career (as opposed to a civilian
career)
56% planned to stay at least until retirement
62% rated their advancement opportunities
as very good or excellent

© 70% were satisfied with their current
assignment

© 76% were satisfied with life as an officer,
and

e 55% were satisfied with their career
prospects.



86 4°49} anysu) Youeesey Auuy “s'N (908) sasese9 109130 UO
o. e010 Aeaing jouuosieg Away ASAIN 966} 84} Wo’ ByeEq

puofagq Jo yUsWaja/ [UN
Aeys 0} Buruuejd Ajyuewiny

OL 8SiINOD paouRApy 3y}

JO pud oy} 78 a97e9 AW
ue spsemo} Huluess/Guluueld
%bS juowubisse
jyeys Jsulp Jaye sa0180 Awuiy
ue spiemo} Hulues/buluue|d

EY

%89

Srl PeUOISsIWWOd

uayM Jaere9 Auy ue
spiemo} Hulues/buluueld
KH =AS | %eH=AS | %e-/+=4S
diysiejoyos | diysiejoyos
-UON D.LOH



1996 SOC - 20



86 424 9 aIMnNsu yosessey Awy “s'N (908) 8499125 18910 UO

mn a210 Aeaing jouuosied Auy AsAing 966} yy Woy BEG
SA1IVWA4 = SFAI1VIN SOINVdSIH S\MOV1E SALIHM

%E-/+=AS %1-/+=AS %S-/+=AS %E-/+=AS %I1-/+=4aS
. - + %0

f %02

r %09

asopd Araasasoys Sunt0das %

%LL %zL %OL

r %08

£sennp youesq anos
Jo Ay[var ay) SNS.1IA SUOT}R}IIdxXI [VITUI sos
INOA UdIMjOQ FJ IY} SI AVJ/ISO]D MOF]

ALITVWAY GNV SNOILVLOAdX4



R CURRENT ASSIGNMEN

{ Very poor
|
30. Please use the scale below to evaluate your current [ Fair
supervisor/rater. However, if you are currently in school or [ Good
training, please evaluate your previous supervisor/rater. [ Very good
Recognizing/rewarding subordinates IO} 1}
Overall leadership effectiveness iO} 1D
Technical competence |O} 1O}
Caring about what happens to his/her soldiers iO} O}
Interested in what | think and feel about things \OjO} ‘eS
In terms of work habits and on-the-job behavior, sets the right example by his/her actions (e) ©
Cc Very poor
C Poor
31. Please use the scale below to evaluate the nature of your = Fair
current assignment. However, if you are currently in school [ Good
or training, please evaluate your previous duty assignment. [_ Very good

Opportunity to learn/develop skills relevant to your career
Opportunity to do work that interests you
Opportunity to exercise initiative/put your ideas into action

(elerxe)
(olele)
{e)
fe)
(olele)

O}

32. In COLUMN A below, indicate the command level at which you are currently assigned.
33. In COLUMN B below, indicate which ONE position BEST describes the nature of your current duty assignment.
34. In COLUMN C below, indicate the command level of your previous assignment.
35. In COLUMN D below, indicate which ONE position BEST describes the nature of your previous duty assignment.
COL.A. COL. B COL. Cc COL. D
Current Current Previous Previous
Command Level Assignment Command Level ‘Assignment
MARK ONE. MARK ONE, MARK ONE. MARK ONE
Company oO _O
Battalion Oo Oo
Brigade (e) 1@)
Division, Corps. or MACOM. (e) oO
HQDA (oe) (e)
Joint (e) Oo
Other Level (Please list on page 19.) oO Oo
Platoon Leader (or equivalent) (e) (e)
Executive Officer (XO) oO (e)
Commander oO oO
S-, G- or J-1 Personnel (e) ~ (e)
S-, G- or J-2 Intelligence (oe) oO
S-, G- or J-3 Operations (e) (oe)
S-, G- or J-4 Logistics (e) oO
Other Staff Officer (e) oO
Special Branch Position (e.g., Doctor. Chapiain) (e) Oo
Instructor/Trainer oO (e)
Military Training/School @) e)
In Civilian School {@) {e)
Other (Please list on page 19.) (e) (e)

1996 SOC -8



86 qe4 91 einwWsu] Yoseesey Awiy “SN (90S) S190189 489130 UO
€ 2891430 Aening jouuosieg Auy A@AANS 966} 94} WiOd) BEG

SJapjOyoye}s 0} sAIsuOdsayY--
sonssi Ao1jod uo snd04--
[l2Jap J2OIUYI9} JEWIUI|\--

JEUOJ 19}}0|/SMON--

SLYOd3Y 1VIIdOL

SLINS3Y JO SONISSIYE @



. Is your current branch your... 25. Do you intend to try to transfer into a
O first choice? different branch?
O second choice? ONbo. | am not interested in changing branches.
O third choice? ONd, | cannot get into the branch | want.
O fourth choice? O Yes. but | do not expect to get the branch | want.
© Other O Yes, and | do expect to get the branch | want.
O Undecided or don't know

i

26. How good are the opportunities for advancement in
your branch for someone who has had the types of
assignments you have had?

|. How close/far is the fit between your initial
expectations versus the reality of your
branch duties?

O Very close O Excellent
OClose O Very good
oO Borderline © Good
OFar OLimited
Overy far O Very limited

27. How good are the opportunities for command in
your branch?
Ob€xcellent
Overy good
OGood
OLimited
OvVery limited

GO TO QUESTIONS 25-27
IN THE RIGHTHAND COLUMN.

. In COLUMN A below, indicate the functional area you are now in. MARK ONE.
. In COLUMN B below, indicate the functional area you would prefer (if you stay in the Army). MARK ONE.

COL.B
Prefer

8
ra
Z>

‘
{

35—Military Intelligence
39—Psychological Operations and Civil Affairs
41—Personnel Programs Management

45—Comptroller
46—Public Affairs
47—USMA Permanent Faculty

48—Foreign Area Officer .
49—Operations Research/Systems Analysis
50—Force Development

51—Research, Development and Acquisition
52—Nuclear Research and Operations
53—Systems Automation Officer

54—Operations, Plans and Training
70—Health Services
71—Laboratory Sciences

72—Preventive Medical Sciences
73—Behavioral Sciences
75—Veterinary Services

90-—Logistics oe

97—Contracting and Industrial Management _

OO OOO COCO OOO COCO OOO OOO
CO O00 COO OOO COCO OOO OOO

“= = 1996 SOC-7 -



1082-292 NSG
1082-219 (€02)
009S-Eeezz VA ‘eUpueXely
enuaay JemoyUas}y 100S
8910 AeAing jeuuosied Awiy
eynysu] Yoseesey Awuy *S'N

:Aq posedaid

SdNOw+S YACN3AD GNV
WIOVd Ad SAGNLILLV
Y590ISd450 AO NOSIEYVdNOD

SAIIAD AIIY{C) UO KAAANG 966] AYJ UOLT



1. Career Expectations by Type of Branch Assignment

Background: The branches (or career fields)
to which Army officers are assigned can be
separated into four broad categories—combat
arms (CA), combat support (CS), combat
service support (CSS), and special branches.
Each of the first three categories identifies a
group of branches related by their functions on
the battlefield.’

Focus: This section of the report focuses on
the perceptions of a subset of more than 5,500
company grade officers (second lieutenant
through captain). Most of these officers had
been in the Army for 10 years or less and were
at a stage of their individual careers where they
were still making decisions about their future
with the military. Analyses will identify
whether there were differences in officer career
expectations based on type of branch
assignment.

Findings: A number of measures were used in
analyzing career expectations by type of
branch. These measures included the length of
time officers would like or desired to serve, the
length of time they expected to serve, their
current career intent, and other less direct
measures of career expectations, including
officers’ perceptions of command
opportunities, advancement opportunities, and
their satisfaction with certain aspects of Army
life.

A large majority of company grade officers
were not eligible to retire at the time of the
survey and may still have been weighing the
pros and cons of staying in the Army until
retirement. Measures of an officer’s
competitiveness for promotion and satisfaction
with the Army are also good indirect indicators
(or moderators) of career expectations and
career intent--that is, officers who are satisfied
may be more likely to stay.

' The special branches include officers who are in the medical,
dental, religious, or legal fields.

Length of Career. SOC respondents were
asked to report both how many years they
would have liked to have completed by the time
they leave the Army and how many years they
expected to have completed. Figure 1 depicts,
by type of branch, the percent of company
grade officers who reported 20 years or more to
each of these questions.

There are no differences by type of branch
assignment in the percentages of company
grade officers who would have liked to serve at
least 20 years (ranging from 75% to 77%) and
those who expected to serve at least twenty
years (ranging from 62% to 63%). However,
the majority of these officers, regardless of type
of branch, were significantly more likely to
indicate that they expected to serve fewer years
than they would have liked to. For example,
77% of company grade CA officers would have
liked to serve for 20 years or more; however,
only 61% expected to serve 20 years or more.

100% Desired Careor Length

Expected Career Length

75%

30%

0%

0%

on

css
SE=H%

ca
SE=W-2%

Figure 1. Desired and Expected Career Length

SE=W-3%

There were no differences among
individual branches within CS or CSS.
However, there were some variations among



% Who Got Branch of Firet Choice

Choice of Branch. Figure 11 indicates
that White officers (71%) were significantly
more likely than Black (58%) or Hispanic
(56%) officers to report that their current
branch was their first choice. Female officers
(60%) were significantly less likely than male
officers (71%) to report that their current
branch was their first choice.

MALES

FEMALES.

BLACK HISPANIC WHITE
OFFICERS OFFICERS OFFICERS.

SEoW0% — SE=WS% — SE=WA% SEWA% SEW

Figure 11. Choice of Branch

Summary. Race/Ethnicity: Several
differences in the attitudes of racial/ethnic
groups were found. Compared to White
officers, a higher proportion of Black officers
reported that they intended to remain in the
Army long-term, although both groups
reported a high level of commitment to the
organization.

Black officers were more likely than
White officers to report their branch was not
their first choice and to express dissatisfaction
with co-workers. However, Black officers
were more likely to report higher satisfaction
with supervisors, promotions, the work they
did, pay, and family issues.

No significant difference was found
between White officers and Hispanic officers
in terms of propensity to remain in the Army;
however, Hispanic officers were less likely
than White officers to be satisfied with

16

supervisors and co-workers, experience less of
a match between career expectations and
duties, and were more likely to report that they
had fewer opportunities for command.
Compared to White officers, significantly
smaller proportions of Black and Hispanic
officers reported that they received their
branch of first choice. Hispanic officers
reported higher satisfaction with pay and
family issues than White officers did.

Gender: Female officers reported
significantly lower satisfaction with family
issues; slightly lower satisfaction with
supervisors, promotions, work, and co-
workers; lower feelings of fit between branch
expectations and duties; and fewer received
their branch of first choice. Female officers’
dissatisfaction with these aspects of their
Army careers is accompanied by significantly
lower commitment and retention propensity.



86 494 91 eINWSU] Yoseesay Awuy ‘s'h (908) s1se1e9 1991439 UO
aL 9010 Aening jauuosieg Auy A@Ains 966} 8u) Wood B3eG

1N31139X3/d005 AYSA/GOOD 3HV

S3ILINNLYOddO LNAWSONVAGY SASI1gg
(YSQNSD/S30VH 40 SSatdYvDaYy) @
SY30ISAO T1V AO ALINOPVIN SHL

LN311539X3/d009 AYSA/GOOD
SV SAILINNLYOddO GNVWIWODS ALVY «
SY39IdAO OF SO LNO Z Y3AO ‘SH30ISAO
JINVdSIH 4O NOILdS39DX43 SHL HLIM

a

S3ILINNLYOddO GNVININOD



86 G24 91 enASU] Yoseesey Awy “S'N (908) SiseseD 4891jJO UO
eb 901.0 Aeaing jouuosieg Auy A®@AANS 966}. OU} WOY ByeEQ

%SV %0S %vS

%9S %CIO %GS9

WEL LL EL

%e-[+ = AS %e-/+ = AS %e-/+ = AS

9|BJOW JO [BAD]
que.inos Yybiusybiy Aa,

s}0edsoud 190189 YIM
peysyes/poysnes Ala,

qof yum
peysies/peysnes Ala,

VINSN| diysuejoyos] diyssejoyos
OLOH| -UON 0104



86 Ge4 91 onNnSu] Yoseasay Awy "S'n (908) $4991e9 199130 UO
St 301HO Aeaing jouuosieag Awy ABAINS 966} OU} WO} B}eQ
sdnoi6 8uj0 yjog Jo (pa ul ze Yjoq) dnos6 seyjo
QUO WO aoUaIeyIp JUBOIIUBIs e Seyeo!pul Pay
%bv %EE %0V IV %lLE |AVd
%GE %lv %EV %8S %8E |SANSSI ATINVA
BE %0v %CE %Lb %6E |SNOILOINOYd
%09 %v9 %09 %0L %b9 |SHOSIAYSdNS
%99 %69 %LI IL %89 jATASLI WHOM
LY %69 %C9 %bv9 %0L |SHYANMYOMOD

YET

YolF

WSF Yer SolF

ULM UOHORISHES
=3aS

sajewiey soe

sojuedsiy} syoe|q SOU



86 4e4 OL aynWsSU] Yoseasay Awy ‘S'N (90S) $1901289 199110 UO
iz 8010 Asaing jouuosiag Awiy ASAIN 966} 843 Wo.) eVeq

“AQIOHO LSdlsa YISHL SVM
HONVYS LNAYYNO YIAHL LYOd3y
OL AT4SyI1 LSOW 34V SYHADISAO
JTVIN GNV S830IS5sd0 ALIHM



io

86 984 91 eyMNsSU] yYoeasay Awuy ‘S'N (90S) S190129 429130 UO
ez 3@01o Aeaing jauuosied Awiy Aaning 966} eu3 wos BEG

AVd HLIM GalSSILVS 3a-

OL SHHOWHO WIVIN NVA ATHY T
AUOW AAV SAHOWAO WIVNAA



96 4e4 9b eINywWSu] Yosewesey Auy *s'n (90S) Ssse1e9 1091130 UO
0z 2010 Aeaing jouuosieg Ay A®@AINS 966}. OY} WO. e}eQ

é}oedwi
jeluUsJayIP e pey Hulzisumop sey

€901NOS
Buluoissimwos Aq uoniye jo
9}21 J2N}Oe OY} U! BOUSJOJJIP & 919} S|}

éSAdAins SnolAeid Wo, JUdJEJIP
DOS 966} 94} Wow SHhulpuy au} ay

NOILOAYIC SYNLNA



83. In general, how well has your family adjusted to the
demands of being an “Army family”? MARK ONE.

© Does not apply; | am not married and do not have
dependent children.

Extremely Neither Extremely
Well : Badly
v v v

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
O0OO0O0000 0
84. How satisfied are you with the support and
concern the Army has for your family?
© Does not apply; ! am not married and do not have
dependent children.

O Very satisfied

CO Satisfied

ONeutral

O Dissatisfied

O Very dissatisfied

85. What is your current marital status? MARK ONE.
O Married
O Legally separated or filing for divorce
O Single, never married
O Single, engaged to be married
O Divorced
O Widowed

86. Are you now engaged or significantly involved in
a relationship with someone? In other words, is
there an important girlfriend/boyfriend in your
life right now?
© Does not apply; am currently married
OvYes

ONo
GO TO QUESTION 100 ON PAGE 16.

87. Where is your spouse currently living?
O Does not apply; | am single, divorced or widowed.
O With me at my current CONUS location
O With me at my current OCONUS location
ONot with me and within the 48 continental U.S.
ONot with me and outside the 48 continental U.S.

88. Is your spouse/girlfriend/boyfriend currently
serving on active duty in the U.S. Armed Forces?
ONo
O Yes, on active duty in the Amy
O Yes, on active duty with another U.S. service

89. Is your civilian spouse/girlfriend/boytriend

90.

91

92.

93.

currently working in a civilian job (including a
job with the U.S. Army/Department of Defense)?
MARK ONE.
© Does not apply: my spouse/girlfriend/boyfriend is
‘on active duty.
O Yes, full-time
O Yes, part-time
ONb, but is currently ooking for work
ONbo, not looking for work but would like to work
ONo, does not want to work now

How supportive is your spouse/girlfriend/
boyfriend of your making a career of the Army?
O Very supportive

O Fairly supportive

O Mixed or neutral

O Fairly unsupportive

O Very unsupportive

When your spouse/girlfriend/boyfriend was
growing up, did he/she have a parent/guardian
who was career active duty military?

OyYes

ONo

O Don't know

Has your spouse/girlfriend/boyfriend ever served
in the military?

ONo

O Yes. and left betore we decided to get married

O Yes, and left after we were marriediengaged

O Yes. and is still in. but intending to get out

OvYes, and is still in. but undecided about staying

O Yes, and is stil! in, and intending to stay

What is the highest level of education your

spouse/girlfriend/boyfriend has completed?

O Less than high school degree

QOvdigh school degree, GED, or equivalent

O Some college. no degree

O Graduate of 2-year college or technica! schoo!

O Graduate of 4-year college

© Some graduate schoo! courses, no degree

O Masters degree

© Doctorate or professional degree, such as MD.
DDS, or JD

1996 SOC ~ 15 : a

whe



86 994 OL
bb

Sa 1V Waa

%E-1+=4AS

eynNWSU] Ywasey Awiy “S°n
3010 Aeaing jouu0sieg Auiy

SAVIN

%1-=AS

%0L

SOINVdSIH SMOV1E

®S-/+=AS

ALY

%E-H=AS

bl

puodoq 10 U9UIN.190.1 [QUN

Aes

I

pia Avy) Sun10da. 1U99.10g
INALNI 4aSydV9

(208) s1991e5 189130 UO
ASAIN 966} OUy WO} EYeG

SALIHM

M1-I+=AS

%89

+ %0

r %0¢

+ %0v

%09

+ %08



94. Does your spouse/girlfriend/boyfriend plan to
get additional education/training? MARK ONE.
ONo
O Yes, currently in school/training
O Yes, planning additional education/training

©
a

. How difficult do you think it would be for your
spouse/girlfriend/boyfriend to get the kind of
jobs/career opportunities he/she wants if you
decide to make the Army a career?
© Does not apply; my spouse/girlfriend/boyfriend is not
interested in a paid job.

O Does not apply; | have already decided to make the
Army a career.

O Very difficult

O Difficult

ONot especially difficult or easy

OEasy

O Very easy

© Don't know

o
a

. How difficult do you think it would be for your
spouse/girlfriend/boyfriend to get the kind of
jobs/career opportunities he/she wants if you
left the Army at your next opportunity?
ODoee not apply: my spouse/girifriend/boyfriend is not

interested in a paid job.
O Very difficult
O Difficult
ONbot especialiy difficult or easy
O€Easy
O Very easy
© Don't know

©
J

. Would you leave the Army if your spouse/
girlfrier-d/boyfriend could not find the type of
employment he/she wants?

O Definitely yes
O Probably yes
O Probably no
O Definitely no
O Don't know

©
2

. Overall, how satisfied is your spouse/girlfriend/
boyfriend with the Army as a way of life?
O Very satisfied
O Satisfied
O Neutral

©
o

. How satisfied is your spouse/girlfriend/
boyfriend with the support and concern the
Army has for your family?
© Does nat apply: | do not have a family.

O Very satistied
O Satisfied
ONeutral

O Dissatistied

CURRENTEVENTS __

100. As a result of world events in the late 1980s and <

. If further/additional troop reductions

thus far in the 1990s and with the decreasing size

of the Army, please indicate the likelihood that the
following may occur:

MARK A RESPONSE FOR EACH.

Very unlikely

Very likely

You will work more hours than you do now.

You will be able to stay in the Army and get
promoted on or ahead of schedule.

You will be able to stay in the Army beyond
your current obligation.

You will be allowed to serve until eligible for
retirement from the Army.

The best field grade officers will stay in the
Army.

The best company grade officers will stay in
the Army.

The best Sr. NCOs will stay in the Army.

The best Jr. NCOs will stay in the Army.

The best junior enlisted soldiers will stay in
the Army.

You will be involuntarily released from the
Army.

QO 0 00 0 0.0 0 0 90
O_O 00 0 0 0 0 0 9
OO OO OO 0 OO 0

are made, how likely is it that the
reductions will result in the following:
MARK A RESPONSE FOR EACH.

Readiness will suffer.
Morale will suffer.

lOO OO
OO OO

eee
eee
Your family will suffer. eee
You will suffer. eee)

. In the past, the Army has been called upon to deploy

troops to certain regions of the world in response to

urgent international situations. Did you personally

deploy/relocate to any of the following locations

during the time periods indicated?

MARK ALL THAT APPLY.

O Vietnam (March 1962—-January 1973)

© Grenada (October 1983—November 1983)

© Panama (December 1989-January 1990)

O Southwest Asia (August 1990-April 1991)

© Somalia (December 1992—March 1994)

© Macedonia (July 1993-present)

CO dHaiti (September 1994-present)

© Bosnia (December 1995-present)

© Does not apply; | have not been depioyed to any of
these.

O Very dissatisfied

= 1996 SOC - 16 |



86 494 9b aiNNsuU] yYoeesay Auuy “S'n (90S) S190189 189130 UO
6 920130 Aeains jouuosieg Auy Aeaans 966} eu} Woy eyeg

AaYoV ATSNOULS/ASY9OV OHM SY30Isd0 JO LNSOYAd

%68 %GS %SP sods OYs pue SOWSW 9}1IM
%L8 %8S %ES 8Sinoo dIseq Youesq
Aw jo sjuswesinbes au] Je}Seuw
%G6 %69 %bLO sbuljeig
pue suoljejuasaid jeio jONpuoCD
%S6 %SL KEL JBOIJJO SAIOAJJo UB og

%e-/+ = AS %e-/+ = AS %e-/+ = AS

70} ow paiedaid
Burureay Aseyiwi Bujuolss}ww0s-aid Ay

WIsn]| diysaejoyos] diyssejoyos
-UON 9.LOH

To id
ONINIVUL ONINOISSIWINOD-3ud ey ]



LEADER DEVELOPMENT

1. Of the training courses/schools listed below, which ONE did you complete most recently? MARK ONE.

NY

»

>

a

O Officer Basic Course (OBC)
© Officer Advanced Course (OAC)

O Combined Arms and Services Staff School (CAS*)—non-resident
O Combined Arms and Services Staff School (CAS*)—resident
©Command and General Staff Officers Course (CGSC)—non-resident
©Command and General Staff Officers Course (CGSC)—resident

© Other Service MEL-4 equivalent—non-resident
© Other Service MEL-4 equivalent—resident

. What year did you complete the most

recent course/school you identified above?

19 @@
OO@OOOQOOO®

For that most recent course/school identified above,
would you say you received it ... MARK ONE.

Otoo early in your career?

Oat about the tight time in your career?

Otoo late in your career?

}. To what extent did the most recent course/school

you have completed...
MARK A RESPONSE FOR EACH.

prepare you for successful leadership?
contribute toward your professional development?
instill Army values?

prepare you to perform your current duties?
prepare you to perform your current leader tasks?
prepare you for your future assignments?

prepare you to effectively perform your wartime duties?
prepare you to perform multinational contingency missions
(such as peace-keeping)?

. Please indicate your level of agreement with the

following statements.
MARK A RESPONSE FOR EACH.

1am confident | will be promoted as high as my ability and interest warrant if | stay in the Army.

The Army will protect my benefits and retirement.

lam confident | will get the kinds of assignments | need to be competitive for promotions.

lam very likely to get assignments that match my skills and interests if | stay in the Army.
The officer evaluation/selection system is effective in promoting the best officers.
The officer evaluation/selection system rewards officers for integrity and professionalism.

OAmny War College (AWC)—non-resident

O Anny War College (AWC)—resident

O Other Service MEL-1 equivalent—non-resident
O Other Service MEL-1 equivalent—resident

No basis to judge

Not at all

Slight extent

Moderate extent

Great extent

Very great extent

000 900

(O_O O00 O00

Strongly disagree

Disagree

Neither agree nor disagree

Agree

Strongly agree

OOO O00

= 1996 SOC -4



96 994 OL enyWIsSu] youwesey Auy *S"N (90S) Si8eseD 199130 UO
Ze 9910 AsAing jauUOsieg Auy ASAINS 966} OY} WO Beg

Q/eOW JO [OAB] JBYBIY & YOdS1 gun

4991289 JIOU}
UUM pases AJaA/Pasies 9q <—gam

sqol ju9u1N9 41194}
YM poysnes AlsA/paljsyes oq <n

“* 0} AJM] JSOW O42 S199IJJO D1LOY

JIVHOW - HASHVD - Gor



APPENDIX C

BRIEFING CHARTS FOR

DIFFERENCES IN ATTITUDES
TOWARD THE ARMY AMONG RACIAL
AND GENDER GROUPS



Study Report 99-03

Findings from the Survey on Officer Careers --
1996

Human Resources Research Organization

June T. Jones
U.S. Army Research Institute

Army Personnel Survey Office
Morris P. Peterson, Chief

U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences
5001 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, Virginia 22333-5600

August 1999

Ss

Army Project Number Army Personnel Management
433709 and Support Activiites

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

iii



86 40491 ens] Yoseesay Auy “S"n (90S) S190125 189110 UO
L 8010 Aeaing jouuosieg Ay ASAANS 966} OY} WO’ BEG

siayew-Adijod SWwOjul
pue sonss! Aey sessoippe
JEU} S1991LD JBOIJO
uo eJep AdAINS PSION

“""aSOddNnd

GQNnNOYSMoOVva



pe

APPENDIX B

BRIEFING CHARTS FOR

OFFICER ATTITUDES BY
COMMISSIONING SOURCE



86 qe OL @ynNsu] Yoseasay Awuy “S'N (908) s19281e89 49910 UO
z 8010 Asaing jouuosieg Awiy ASAiNS 966} OU} Wo. Beg

Z661 Pue ‘O66! ‘6861 ‘886} Ul pa}onpuog
Aaaing (90H) sa9a1e9
J991IJJO UO YdJeeSoeY jeuIpNybHuo7] |@

V861-086} S8SSP]9D VINSN 40} JUSWIIWWLUOD
4990189 pue Sanss! 190129 UO pasnso-

(2861-0861) SN9}01q 199l01g |

VINS/ U! UBWOM jo yOedUI! palpn}s
(0861-9261) Busuiy Weloid @

ge lf =

annoudyova ie)



Table 4. Officer Ratings of Career and Family Benefits With Civilian Job

Survey Items

Percentage reporting following benefits somewhat

or much better in civilian life
Pay
Overall standard of living
Overall quality of life
Opportunities to advance in chosen field

Percentage believing transition to civilian sector would

be easy or very easy
Finding a good civilian job right now
Leaving the Army in the next year

Percentage reporting that spouse/significant other (SO)

is supportive of or satisfied with the Army
Spouse/SO supports an Army career

Overall, spouse/SO is satisfied with Army life
Spouse/SO satisfied with Army support for family 44% 50% 44%

Percentage believing civilian life would have positive
impact on family [these are representative, but are not

all of the items reviewed]

Total family income better in civilian life 11% 65% 86%
Employment/educational opportunities better for

spouse 55% 54% 59%
Spouse’s overall satisfaction better in civilian life 64% 58% 69%
Time for personal/family life better in civilian life 86% 86% 87%
Better quality of child care/schools/youth facilities in

civilian life 41% 42% 48%

ROTC-S ROTC-NS USMA

SE=+/-2%  SE=+/-2% SE=+/-2%
10% 63% 87%
60% 54% 73%
58% 54% 67%
41% 36% 52%
53% 44% 68%
37% 271% 51%
74% 84% 71%
58% 65% 54%

for families. They were also least likely to
think it would be easy to find a good civilian
job.

The majority of all officers believed that
time for personal and family life would be
better in civilian life.

Summary. There are statistically significant
differences in officer commitment to an Army
career among the three commissioning sources
examined.

USMA officers were most likely to
believe a return to civilian life would be easy
and beneficial in terms of career opportunities
and family life. Conversely, ROTC non-
scholarship officers were most likely to report
that they planned to stay in the Army to
retirement and that their spouse/SO supported
an Army career and was satisfied with Army
life and the support the Army provides for
families.



96 994 91 eynyyWsu] Yoseesey Awuy “S'n . (90S) sieese9 1291JJO UO
LL 2010 Asning jouuosieg Auy A®AANS 966}. OY} WO’ BEG

(asojo/asojo A1aA)
éSel]INp youejg ANOA jo Ayyeos
8} SNSJ9A SUO!}E}Edxe [eI}IU!
4JNoA usEeMjeq [IY BY} S| BSOjO MOH]

BL WES %GGS (Suu yequiod) Ul oq 0} dy!)
pinom noA youeigq ay} ayeo!puy
%08 %0S %0S (swuy yequiod)
yoursg }U91IND JNOA ayeoIpU|
LB %99 REI &9010Y49
ys4yj ANOA YOueJq JUALIN ANOA s|
%e-/+ = AS %O-/+ = AS %e-/+ = AS

VINSN]| diysuejoyos]} diysiejoyos
-UON O.LOY



86 494 9b eynysSU] Yorwesey Auuy ‘s'N (908) sise1e9 199130 UO
a 9910 Aeaing jouuosieg Auy ASAANS 966} OY} WO’ e]eG

%LS LE %1Z sea }xou 0y} ul Au oAee]

%89 %ES %vv qof meu e pul
:BuIMO]|O} 84} Op 0} Asea/Asea Ala,
%eS %bLV %IE pla uasoyo AnoA
ul BOUeAPE O} SalyIUN}IOddO
%L9 %8S %bS aft] JO Ayyenb |je49A9
%vS %8G %GQ | UOl!ORJsI}es ||e19AO S,asnods
VEL %09 %bvS . BulAl| JO psepueys |]/219A0
%LB %0L | %E9 | hed
%98 %bLL «| %G9 ewoou! Ajiwiey }e2}0.)
Oj}l] UBIJIAID Ul J8}{0q JeEYMOEWOS/Ja}}Eq YON!
%e-/+ = AS %e-/+ = AS %o-/+ = AS
diysaejoyos | diysuejoyos
DLO] -UON O10



The pattern of being more likely to remain
as rank increases (shown in Figure 2 above) did
not change significantly when the other
personal characteristics and career variables
were also included in the same analysis
(although the differences among ranks did not
remain as large as in the figure above).

Commissioning source was associated with
intention to stay. Individuals who received a
commission after completing Officer Candidate
School were significantly more likely than
others to report an intention to remain in the
Army (Figure 3). Of officers commissioned
through ROTC, those who held an ROTC
scholarship were less likely to report intending
to stay than officers who did not have a
scholarship. Officers who were commissioned
through USMA were the least likely to report
intending to remain in the Army.

100% TiStay Long-Term
BUosere

ClLeave Early

finding a good civilian job. They also were
more likely to indicate that they believed that
pay and opportunities to advance in the civilian
sector were better than in the military. These
differences were found for both male and
female USMA graduates, but were more
pronounced for male officers.

Other features of an officer’s educational
and parental background also were associated
with career intent. Officers who had been
enrolled in Junior ROTC in high school were
slightly more likely than others to report
intending to stay in the Army. A similar
finding emerged for officers with an Army
parent or guardian. Having attended a military
high school, however, was not a significant
factor. Overall, officers with master’s degrees
had a higher propensity to stay than those with
higher or lower levels of education (Figure 4).

100%,

BBStay Long-Term
Unsure
[Leave Early

85%

ROTC
Scholarship
Sea

ROTC Non-
Scholarship
SEv%

SE=W3%

Figure 3. Intention to Stay by Source of
Commission

What factors might account for these
differences? Prior military service could be a
contributing factor. Persons who had been in
Officer Candidate School or in an ROTC
program but without a scholarship were more
likely than others to have had prior active-duty
military experience. The lure of civilian job
opportunities also seemed to have an impact.
USMA graduates anticipated the least difficulty

BS/BA OR LESS. MS/MA-SOME
GRADUATE

SEWS%

Ph.D/PROFESSIONAL

SE=WoK SE=W4%

Figure 4. Intention to Stay by Level of
Education

Differences by race, ethnicity, and gender
were also examined and are discussed in detail
in Section 4 of this report. Briefly, compared
to White and Hispanic officers, Black officers

"were significantly more likely to report an

il

intent to remain in the Army long-term and
male officers were significantly more likely
than female officers to report that they intended
to remain in the Army long-term.



REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE

1, REPORT DATE 2. REPORT TYPE 3. DATES COVERED:
August 1999 Final May 1996-September 1996
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5a. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER
MDA903-93-D-0032, DO 42
Findings from the Survey on Officer Careers--1996 Sb. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER
6. AUTHOR(S) Sc. PROJECT NUMBER
Human Resources Research Organization (HumRRO), NA
June Taylor Jones, U.S. Army Research Institute 6d. TASK NUMBER
7001

5e. WORK UNIT NUMBER

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER
HumRRO U.S. Army Research Institute for the

66 Canal Center Plaza Behavioral and Social Sciences

Suite 400 ATTN: TAPC-ARI-PS

Alexandria, VA 22314-1591 5001 Eisenhower Avenue
Alexandria, VA 22333-5600

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. MONITOR ACRONYM
U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social

Sciences ARI
5001 Eisenhower Avenue 11, MONITOR REPORT NUMBER

Alexandria, VA 22333-5600

Study Report 99-03

12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

13, SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
COR, June Taylor Jones

14. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 words):

This report summarizes findings from the 1996 Survey on Officer Careers (SOC). SOC is a continuation of the
Longitudinal Research on Officer Careers (LROC) survey research program. The LROC program called for similar
surveys to be mailed to a longitudinal sample of company grade officers each year over a number of years. Surveys
were administered in 1988, 1989, 1990, and 1992. The SOC was first administered in May of 1996. Samples for
SOC included all officers who had responded to any of the LROC surveys and who were still on active duty, as well
as a new randomly-drawn cross-sectional sample of officers at all ranks. This report summarizes findings for the
new 1996 cross-sectional sample of officers. The SOC continues to provide data on the values, attitudes, family
situations, and career experiences of Army officers who are serving in Army Competitive Category branches. SOC
results will be used to test models of work, career, family, and personal factors that influence officers’ career
decisions. The SOC also provides a rich longitudinal database for examining the Army experience from a long-term
perspective.

15. SUBJECT TERMS

Army Officers Job Satisfaction Career Intent Army Attitudes © Gender Differences Branch Differences Source of Commissioning
19. LIMITATION OF } 20. NUMBER 21, RESPONSIBLE PERSON

proces z
ABSTRACT OF PAGES (Name and Telephone Number)

16. REPORT 17. ABSTRACT | 18. THISPAGE | Unlimited
Unclassified Unclassified Unclassified 94 Dr. Morris Peterson

(703) 617-7801



73.

N
~

~
a

~
a

x

»

How difficult would it be for you financially to be
unemployed for 2 or 3 months if you needed time
to find a new job?

O Very difficult

ODifficutt

ONot particularly difficult or easy

O€Easy

O Very easy

. How competitive for schools and promotions

would you be if you were to be evaluated right
now, taking the nature of your assignments—as
weil as your performance—into account.

Old have a strong advantage.

Ord have an advantage.

ONo advantage or disadvantage

Old be ata disadvantage.

Od be at a strong disadvantage.

. Have the reductions in the size of the Army made

you more or less interested in staying in the Army
now than you were a year ago?

© Much more interested

O More interested

O About the same

C Less interested

© Much iess interested

O Undecided

. How does the Army's involvement in multinational

contingency missions (e.g., peace-keeping) affect
your career intentions?

Ol intend to stay longer.

Ol intend to teave sooner.

ONo change in my career intentions

ONot sure

Do the recent changes in the Officer Professional
Development System (OPDS) make you more or
less interested in staying in the Army than you
were a year ago?
CONbo basis to judge: | have not heard about or do
not know enough about the OPDS changes.
C Much more interested
O More interested
© About the same
OLess interested
© Mucn tess interested
O Undecided

78.

79.

80.

81.

82.

1996 SOC - 14

If the Army has to continue with a drawdown, to
what extent do you think each of the following
programs should be used to meet end-strength
requirements? MARK A RESPONSE FOR EACH.
No basis to judge
Not at all
Slight extent
Moderate extent
Great extent

Voluntary Separation Incentive/
Special Separation Bonus Programs
(VSI/SSB) [used as an alternative to a RIF]

Voluntary Early Release/Retirement
Program (VERRP)

Reduction-in-Force (RIF)

Selective Early Retirement Board (SERB)
Promotion slowdown
Promotion selection rate reduction

OOO OOO
(lelemielemre)

Allin all, how satisfied are you with your job?
O Very satisfied

O Satisfied

O Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied

O Dissatisfied

O Very dissatisfied

Allin all, how satisfied are you with your career
prospects in the Army?

O Very satisfied

O Satisfied

O Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied

O Dissatisfied

O Very dissatisfied

How would you rate your current level of morale?
O Very high

Odigh

O Moderate

OLow

O Very low

At the present time, what level of strain, conflict,
or stress—if any—are you experiencing . ..
MARK A RESPONSE FOR EACH.

Very high
High
Moderate
Low ©
Very low
None
YoY
in your job? OO

in your personal life?

lomme)
in your family life? oO Oo



86 qe4 91 aINWSu] Yorwesay Awy “S'N (908) s1928189 41391}}0 UO
ZL 2910 Aening jouuosieg Auy A®AINS 9664 BY} WO. eyeEG

(%9p) AWd--

(%Lr) SNOILOWOWd--
(%8S) S3NSSI ATINV4--
(%92) 4I1T35S.1LI MHYOM SHL--

HLIM GalsdaSILVS 34 OL A1ayI1 LSOW

dV SYs0IsO MOV1E
4417 AWYV HLIM NOILOVASILVS



The Survey on Officer Careers (SOC) continues a research project to track the attitudes and
experiences of officers during their careers in the Active Component of the United States Army. The
US. Army Research Institute (ARI) began this project with the Longitudinal Research on Officer
Careers (LROC) Survey which was conducted in 1988, 1989, 1990 and 1992. The SOC gives you an
opportunity to provide input into the policy and program decisions impacting all officers. The survey
questionnaire covers a wide range of issues related to your job, your career, and the Army. The results
will be provided to senior Army leaders for their planning and policy and program decisions. The
SOC provides the Army with in-depth coverage of issues and changes in an officer’s career and in the

officer corps over time.

Thank you for your support for this survey and your dedication to duty!

PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT

1. Public Law 93-573 (Privacy Act of 1974) requires that you be informed of the purpose and uses to
be made of the information collected.

2. The Department of the Army may collect the information requested in this survey under the
authority of 10 United States Code 2358. Use of Social Security Numbers is authorized by
Executive Order 9397. Providing information in this questionnaire is voluntary. Failure to
respond to any specific question will not result in any penalty.

4. The information collected in the survey will be used solely for research purposes. Your Social
Security Number (SSN) is requested only for linking data files. In accordance with federal
regulations, the survey data will be safeguarded to protect your privacy. After we have used your
SSN to create the data files, a new identification code will be created to replace your SSN. The
file linking your SSN to the new ID code will be placed in a classified safe at ARI. Only survey
statisticians with a documented, approved need will have access to the linking file.

5. After you have completed the survey, please place the questionnaire in the business reply mail
envelope provided, seal the envelope, and mail it.

Prepared by:

ARMY PERSONNEL SURVEY OFFICE
U.S. Army Research Institute
for the Behavioral and Social Sciences
ATTN: PERI-PS
5001 Eisenhower Avenue -
Alexandria, VA 22333-5600

TELEPHONE: Commercial (703) 617-7801
DSN 767-7801

E-MAIL: APSO@ARLFED.US

PLEASE DO NOT WRITE IN THIS AREA

OmOOOC BOO MMOMOOD000000O - 11397

Lal 1996 SOC -2



U.S. Army Research Institute
for the Behavioral and Social Sciences

A Directorate of the U.S. Total Army Personnel Command

EDGAR M. JOHNSON
Director

Research accomplished under contract
for the Department of the Army

Human Resources Research Organization
Technical Review by

Beverly C. Harris
Trueman R. Tremble

NOTICES

DISTRIBUTION: Primary distribution of this Study Report has been made by ARI.
Please address correspondence concerning distribution of reports to: U.S. Army
Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Attn: TAPC-ARI-PO, 5001
Eisenhower Ave., Alexandria, VA 22333-5600.

FINAL DISPOSITION: This Study Report may be destroyed when it is no longer
needed. Please do not return it to the U.S. Army Research for the Behavioral and Social

Sciences.

NOTE: The findings in this Study Report are not to be construed as an official
Department of the Army position, unless so designated by other authorized documents.



86 404 91 @InNSU] Yoseasey AWy "Ss'N (208) siv981e9 1991419 UO
R 9010 Aeaing jauUOsieg Auy ASAANS 966} O42 WO BEG

LNSIWSdILAd TLNA AVLS--
AWdV AHL OL GALLININOD 38--
SANSSI ATINVSA HLIM G3aIsSILVS 3a--
S3SILNG HONVYE TWNLOV
GNV SNOILVLOAdX]A NASAMLAG
Lid SSO19 AYSAN/ASOTO V LHUOdsu--
ASIOHO LSdla JO HONVUE YISHL NI 3a--

* "OL SHAOMAO WIVINGH NVA
ATOSTT HHOW AAV SHAOMAO WIV



96 4e4 OL eynipSu] yYoseesey Awy “S'N (90S) SiseseD 10910 UO
v 89110 Aening jouuosieg Auiy A@AINS 966} OY} WO’ BEG

Auiy ay} YM
UJEUIAY O} SUOIUAJU] SJBDJO Jo sisAjeuy »

sdnoJj5 Japuat pue jeisey Buowy Auuy
94] PleEMOL SAPNIHY Ul saouasaysiq Jo sisAjeuy »4

juawubissy
youedg so adh Aq suoijejoadx7 s901eg

a0/Nog BujuojssjuWiog Aq SePNUHY 42910 4

aIGe|IeAY MON SHOodey jecido],

Sionaoud—S*~S*w

ae



47.

48.

rs
o

a
i}

Please indicate to what extent you would
describe yourself as “A PERSON WHO...”
MARK A RESPONSE FOR EACH.

“I gen

has original ideas. ro O0000 ol
masters all details painstakingly. OOOO00O0
never acts without proper authority. OQOQOOOOOO
copes with several new ideas at

same time. OCO0000
conforms. OO0000O0
is methodical and systematic. OOO0C00O0
proliferates ideas. OOO0000
is thorough. OCOOO00O0
is stimulating. OO00000
fits readily into “the system.” OOO0000
is prudent when dealing with .

authority. OCOO000C0O0
has fresh perspectives on old

problems. OO0O0000
enjoys detailed work. OOO0000
motivates subordinates OOO000O0
is flexible. OOO00000
is easily adaptable. OCO0O00O0
copes well with uncertainty. OOO0000
demonstrates Army values. OOOO0000

. While serving at your current rank, how often

have you been faced with problems that require
unique solutions? .

Not All
at of the
all time

oO 0 0 0 O89 O 9O

. In your capacity as an officer, have you ever

been asked or pressured by a superior to do
something you consider unethical?

O Yes

ONo

. While serving at your current rank, have you

ever been asked or pressured by a superior to
do something you consider unethical?

O Yes

ONo

51.

Do you fee! that unethical behavior is a
problem in the Army Officer Corps?
ONota problem at all

O Small problem

© Moderate problem

O Serious problém

O Very serious problem

. To what extent have the Army values taught in

Army leadership courses been put into practice
by the superiors in your chain of command?

O Very great extent

O Great extent

© Moderate extent

O Slight extent

ONotat all

. Have you been treated any differently in your

job or career because of your race or ethnic
background?

O Yes, more positively

O Yes, more negatively

ONo

. Have you been treated any differently in your

job or career because of your sex (gender)?
O Yes, more positively
O Yes, more negatively

ONo

. What are the primary sources of any

uncertainty you have right now about what you
could expect from an Army career?

MARK ALL THAT APPLY.

O My lack of experience in the Army

OMy career goals are unclear

O Inconsistent or unclear selection criteria for officers
O-Changes in Army manpower needs

© Impending Congressional action (budgets. RIFs, etc.)
©! don't have any uncertainty

© Other (Please list on page 19.)

. How easy or difficult will it be for you to"adapt

to the increasing high-tech demands of the

future Army?

© Does not apply; | am retiring or leaving the Army
soon.

© Does not apply; my job will not become increasingly
high-tech.

O Very easy

O€Easy

ONeither easy nor difficuit

O Difficult
O Very difficult

1996 SOC - 10


ADDITIONAL COMMENTS j :

If you would like to make any comments on the topics of this survey or any other Army topics of
concern to you and your family members, please write them in the space below.

i

If applicable, please indicate the question number to which your comment is related.

PLEASE DO NOT WRITE IN THIS AREA

29000000 11397

fesesoc-19 | ; _



86 404 91 9yNWSU] Yoessey Awy ‘s'N (908) s199se5 1991jj9 UO
sz 391H0 Asaing jauuosieg Auy AGAIN 966} Uy} WO BEG

«AJIOHD LSUld,, JO HONVYG YISHL NI 3d--

SdsayxYOM-OD HLIM G3IASILVS 3d--

‘"OL ATHMTT
LSOW Gav SAYHOMAHO ALTHM



6. Did you participate in the Junior Reserve Officer
Training Program (JROTC) during high school?
ONb, there was no JROTC program at my high

school.
ONbo, | did not participate in JROTC in high school.
O Yes, | participated in JROTC during the following
grades: MARK ALL THAT APPLY.
O 9th grade O 11th grade
O 10th grade O 12th grade

7. If you participated in JROTC in high school,
what was the service branch?
O Does not apply: | did not participate in JROTC.

Oasny

Onavy

OAir Force

O Marines

8. Did you attend a military high school?

ONo

OvYes, | attended during the following grades:
MARK ALL THAT APPLY.
O 9th grade O 11th grade
O 10th grade O 12th grade

Please indicate your level of agreement with the
following statements.

9. My pre-commissioning military training (USMA,
ROTC, OCS) prepared me to...
MARK A RESPONSE FOR EACH.

[ Strongly disagree |
[ Disagree
[ Neither agree nor disagree
{ Agree
Cc Strongly agree

master the requirements of my Branch

Basic Course. 2
conduct ora! presentations and briefings. {O|O|OjO:
write memos and short reports. eeee
be an effective officer. eleele)

OO

10. When did you begin your active commissioned
service in the Army?

19 [oJoxoxo)
OO@QOOOOO®)

11. What was the source of your commission?
OROTC scholarship
OROTC non-scholarship
OuSMA
Oocs
O Direct
O Other

12. Upon commissioning from ROTC, were you
designated as a DMG (Distinguished Military
Graduate)? :
© Does not apply: | am not an ROTC graduate.
OvYes
ONo

13. How many years of active duty service have you
completed (including any enlisted or warrant
officer time)?

NOTE: FOR SINGLE-DIGIT RESPONSES,

START WITH “0.”
Years OOO®
Completed MODOOOOOO®

14, How many years of active duty service do you
expect to have completed by the time you leave the
Army?

Years
Expected

@O0O®
MOOODOOODOD)

15. How many years of active duty service would you
like to have completed by the time you leave the
Army?

Years
Like to

16. When you were first commissioned, how many
years was your initial obligation to the Army?

Initial

Obligation MOOOOOOVOO®

17. How many months do you have left in your
obligated period of active duty service (including
additional obligations incurred from PCS, military
training, civilian schooling)?

Ol have completed my current obligation.

Months OD®OOOOOO®
Left MOQOOOQOOO®D
1996 SOC -5 =n

i



86 494 91 ayNWSU] YOeesay Away ‘SN (90S) s198189 49914}9 UO
9z 8010 Aeaing jauuosieg Awiy ASAINS 966} Byy Woy BEG

S3ILNG HONVYE TVNLOV GNV

SNOILVLOAdxX] YISHL NSSMLAE
Lid ASOTO AYSA/ASOTO V LHOdSsu--

41IN31159X3/d009

AY¥AA/GOOD 3eV HONVUYE YISHL NI
SSILINNLYOddO GNVININOS SARIN1SE-

*""OL ATAMTT
LSVa'T Gav SHAOMAO OINVdSIH



Table 2 shows that USMA officers were also
significantly more likely than their ROTC
counterparts to...

be currently assigned to a branch which
was their “first choice,”

be assigned to a Combat Arms (CA)
branch,

want to be assigned to a CA branch, and
report a close fit between initial
expectations and the reality of their
branch duties.

The majority of both USMA and ROTC

officers...

believed the Army provides the same or
better job security than civilian
organizations,

were satisfied or very satisfied with their
current job,

were satisfied with their chances for
promotion, and

believed their opportunities for
advancement are excellent or very good.

While the majority of officers responded
positively to the job satisfaction items in
Table 2, there were significant differences
based on commissioning source for two of
these items:
© compared to ROTC scholarship graduates,
a smaller proportion of non-scholarship
graduates were satisfied with their
promotion opportunities

e USMA graduates were least satisfied with
their current jobs.

Career Intent: The SOC contained a
number of questions to assess officers’ career
intent. In contrast to their more positive
responses in Tables 1 and 2, USMA graduates
were the least likely (54%) to report that they
were planning to stay in the Army until
retirement (upper half of Table 3). ROTC
non-scholarship graduates were the most
likely (75%) to report that they were planning
to stay in the Army until retirement, followed
by ROTC scholarship graduates (62%). The
differences among the three groups are
Statistically significant.

Table 2. Officer Attitudes on Selected Survey Items

ROTC-S ROTC-NS USMA
BRANCH SATISFACTION ITEMS SE=+/-2% — SE=+/-2% — SE=+/-2%
Current branch “first” choice 66% 63% 87%
Currently assigned to combat arms (CA) 50% 50% 80%
Want to be inCA 53% 55% 78%
Close fit between expectations and duties 67% 69% 73%
JOB SATISFACTION ITEMS
Same or better job security than civilian 85% 84% 87%
Satisfied/very satisfied with current job 11% 719% 72%
Satisfied/very satisfied with promotion opportunities 65% 60% 64%
Advancement opportunities excellent/very good 61% 57% 59%



86 404 9b en SU] Yoswesey Ay *s'N (20S) s1se1e9 4991330 UO
6h 8910 Aeving jouuosieg Ay A®SAANS 966) OYA WO.) BEG

JU9WII}81 0} Ae}s 0} pudju! Adu} -
ajesOu! JO JaAd] YHIY AJOA 10 UBIY -
$190129 JOY} YUM UOI]ORJses -
sqof 11904} YUM UOHORYsI}es -

"** Woda 0} Ajay!| B1OW Bie S199IJJO DLO

JIYUNOS ONINOISSININOD NO G4sv4 SYH3AIIAAO
INONV SAINIYIAAAIG TWNIGNLILLV AYV FYAHL



86 4e4 OL anWSU] Yoseesay AWwy *S'n (908) s1994e5 1391439 uO
eh 89130 A@Aing jaUUOSJeg Awy A@AINS 966}. BYR WO. EEG

(%LE) AVd--

HLIM
GAlSSILVS 38 OL ATSyI1 LSV3AT GNV

(%0Z) SYSMYOMOO-
HLIM G3ISSILVS 39 OL A1SayI1 LSON

~ 3aV Sads0lssdO ALIHM

351 AINYV HLIM NOILOVASILVS



86 994 OL eynysu] yoswesey Auy "s'N (90S) si9e8se9 189130 UO
¢ 99130 AeAing jouuosied Auy ABAANS 966} OU} WO. BEG

OUI, JAACQ Japuay
pue a2ey Aq saduajiedxy pue sepnyyy 12940

Aully ay} aaeaT
OUuM S499IJO Buleluatayig siojoey Jo sishjeuy

Sapnjilly ,S420lJO uo uMopmesq
ay} PUB OdWALdO JO S}9a4JJ ay} Jo sasfjeuy ¥

UOISSIUIWIOD Jo a91no0g Aq s4olAeyag UOHNY
pue sapnilyiy ,S4a94jO Ueamjeq sdiysuojjejay x

‘OpNnjou] |IAA SHOdeyY sinyn

~ g19ndoud



86 404 91 eainysu] yoseasey Awy “sn (908) si9981e9 189130 UO
L 2010 Aeaing jauuosied Au A®AINS 966} OY} Wid’ Beg

€901NOS Huluolssiwiwod
41Iay} UO peseg ‘Aj}UeoIIUBIS
JdJIP SOPNPPe ,SAVDIJJO OG

Lo ~

diysiejouos diysaejoyos

-UON 9LOU JLOY
VINSN

901NOS Huluolssimwoy

ONISSIds AO SNDOA



3. Officers’ Intentions to Remain in the Army

eee

Background: An understanding of factors
related to officer turnover can help the Army
better manage retention, forecast personnel
requirements, and maintain necessary staffing
levels.

Focus: This section of the report focuses on
the perceptions of officers in the ranks of
second lieutenant through lieutenant colonel
and examines the relationships between

selected officer demographics and career intent.

Demographic characteristics at the time SOC
1996 was conducted showed that 85% of Army
Competitive Category officers were male, 15%
were female, 77% were White, 12% were
Black, and 5% were Hispanic.

Findings: In the analyses, officers were
classified into three groups (Figure 1): those
who intended to remain in the Army until
retirement or beyond retirement eligibility
(68% of officers), those who were undecided
about when to leave (22% of officers), and
those who indicated they were likely to leave at
the end of their current obligation (10% of
officers).

108%

Lesve Early
SEWI%

Unsure
SE=W-2%

Stay Long-Term
SE=WA%

Figure 1. Officers' Career Intent

10

There was no difference in the intention to
stay in the Army between second and first
lieutenants, with about one out of five reporting
they intended to leave early and 40% reporting
they were undecided (Figure 2). However, as
rank increased, the likelihood of reporting an
intention to stay in the Army also increased.
About two out of three captains and more than
nine out of ten majors and lieutenant colonels
reported that they intended to stay in the Army
long-term.

100% 1 TaStay Long-Term

BUnsure
Leave Early

41%41% 40%3g0,

a

crr
SEE

MAS
SE=W9%

Ltc
SEaW4%

2LT
SE=W3%

aL
SE=W3%

Figure 2. Intention to Stay by Rank

Additional analyses were conducted to
simultaneously examine the relationship
between intention to remain and a range of
personal characteristics and career variables.
Besides rank, these included: current status
(Regular Army or other), years of service
completed, current branch type (CA, CS, CSS),
command assignment, commissioning source,
gender, race, educational attainment, marital
status, and presence of young children in the
household.