FY 18 IWC DCO BOARD

[bubblehead]

Also, as others have stated the competitiveness for 1835 has escalated to almost absurd levels.

The DCO competitiveness seems like a byproduct of the sheer number of people who want to be 1835's as well as the current manning levels for 1835.. They are overmanned. Promotions to O4 are not what the were previously by any means.

Sure, tell people that they need to speak several languages and have an engineering degree to be competitive, neither of which they will use as a Reserve 1835, or at least they will not based on my observations.

 

[exNavyOffRec]

The DCO competitiveness seems like a byproduct of the sheer number of people who want to be 1835's as well as the current manning levels for 1835.. They are overmanned. Promotions to O4 are not what the were previously by any means.

Sure, tell people that they need to speak several languages and have an engineering degree to be competitive, neither of which they will use as a Reserve 1835, or at least they will not based on my observations.

None of the Intel O's I have know have ever needed to speak a foreign language.

 

[USNAVY]

This is all a load of sh*t, none of which is needed to succeed as an 1835 in the Reserve. I've seen 1835's who are, in their civilian jobs, school teachers, lawyers, IT people, and sales people. Even seen an active duty Seabee come to the Reserve who changed over to 1835. Person is now an O5.

^^^^ This makes me feel a lot better

 

[jagM3]

^^^^ This makes me feel a lot better

I think that statement by @bumblebee gives a pretty inaccurate picture of the current reality of the program -- that was the reality of the 1835 (then 1635) program in 1997, not 2017. All of these school teachers, former Seabees, etc. all came in years ago before the program became overmanned, exclusive, and highly competitive. Notice that @bumblehead stated the person was an O5 now...that means he probably came in just around 9/11 or perhaps even in the late 1990s. That was a different era. There are stay at home mothers who are 1835 Captains who came in during the 1990s and are now among the most senior reserve leaders in the IWC. They all freely admit, and quite often to be honest, that they would never have made it in as a new Ensign in today's 1835 program.

You don't need an impressive resume to succeed as an 1835, it is relatively easy to be frank -- just do your GMTs on time and maintain all your readiness requirements and you'll be viewed as a "highly capable officer." Problem is, this last board received ca. 500 applications and selected about 50. That is a TEN PERCENT selection rate. If you aren't top tier in the foreign policy, intelligence, or cyber security world in 2017 with the credentials and years of experience to back it up, you aren't getting selected. I hate the "well I know a bus driver/janitor/etc. who was selected" argument and is now an O6! That's just not reality anymore.

The only exception to a lot of this is if you are ALREADY a Naval officer in any capacity and want to re-designate to 1835, which is a pretty simple process with a high chance of selection...but that is not through the DCO program.

 

[FormerRecruitingGuru]

@NavyOffRec and @jagM3 nailed it. In my time in recruiting, I have never seen someone like a teacher get accepted to become a DCO.

 

[Mark I]

@NavyOffRec and @jagM3 nailed it. In my time in recruiting, I have never seen someone like a teacher get accepted to become a DCO.

Not to be the exception that proves the rule...but, I got selected in January and I'm a teacher.

 

[exNavyOffRec]

Not to be the exception that proves the rule...but, I got selected in January and I'm a teacher.

24/25 year old teacher with just a Bachelor's and nothing else? that is who I, and I presume the others are speaking of, or are you a person that had several degrees, led people? done research?

 

[FormerRecruitingGuru]

Not to be the exception that proves the rule...but, I got selected in January and I'm a teacher.

Teacher as in grade school.

 

[Mark I]

I'm not a grade school teacher, I'm a 28-year old teaching assistant at a university where I'm finishing my PhD. Yes, I do have an MA and, yes, I have done research overseas for long periods of time. But I still consider myself a teacher and in many ways a grade school teacher probably has put in more time learning about pedagogy and getting certified than I ever have. And in terms of leading people, I think that's exactly what teachers do. I can't think of any civilian job that better complements the role of an intelligence officer: analyze, synthesize, and contextualize complex information to large groups of non-specialists. Teachers do this everyday in the classroom. That's the argument I made at my board interview and the one I put in my letter. I guess someone bought it.

I read this forum and I see so many people get caught up in what will make the perfect package. I don't have the answer to that, because most of the profiles that are presented here are very different from my own and I honestly didn't think my academic background would have been competitive. But, I self-identify as a teacher and I believe in that label regardless of my other accomplishments. I'd like to think it even played a role in my getting selected. Just going to the mat for fellow educators, that's all.

And after all, this guy turned out to be a pretty good officer:

 

[USNAVY]

I'm not a grade school teacher, I'm a 28-year old teaching assistant at a university where I'm finishing my PhD. Yes, I do have an MA and, yes, I have done research overseas for long periods of time. But I still consider myself a teacher and in many ways a grade school teacher probably has put in more time learning about pedagogy and getting certified than I ever have. And in terms of leading people, I think that's exactly what teachers do. I can't think of any civilian job that better complements the role of an intelligence officer: analyze, synthesize, and contextualize complex information to large groups of non-specialists. Teachers do this everyday in the classroom. That's the argument I made at my board interview and the one I put in my letter. I guess someone bought it.

I read this forum and I see so many people get caught up in what will make the perfect package. I don't have the answer to that, because most of the profiles that are presented here are very different from my own and I honestly didn't think my academic background would have been competitive. But, I self-identify as a teacher and I believe in that label regardless of my other accomplishments. I'd like to think it even played a role in my getting selected. Just going to the mat for fellow educators, that's all.

And after all, this guy turned out to be a pretty good officer:

Very nice. I was an Academic Advisor/Coordinator for 600+ Computer Science Students and the Computer Science Student Veteran Liaison at Florida State University one of the top veteran friendly colleges for a few years to add to my leadership experience. But according to the IW folk that don't mean much. Thoughts? @Mark I

 

[bubblehead]

I think that statement by @bumblebee gives a pretty inaccurate picture of the current reality of the program

No, not really.

-- that was the reality of the 1835 (then 1635) program in 1997, not 2017.

1997? We are talking about the 2009 - present timeframe.

...before the program became overmanned, exclusive, and highly competitive.

Exclusive? Yeah, no. The DCO programs that are exclusive (i.e., "restricted or limited") are METOC, IP, and IW. Of note, promotions to O4 in 183X suck due the sheer number of people in the designator.

Notice that @bumblehead stated the person was an O5 now...that means he probably came in just around 9/11

The individual in question came to the Reserve as a senior LT. Check out the flow points for the different ranks.

The only exception to a lot of this is if you are ALREADY a Naval officer in any capacity and want to re-designate to 1835, which is a pretty simple process with a high chance of selection...but that is not through the DCO program.

There is not a high chance of "selection" for changing your designator. Mostly, it has to do with manning (call PERS) at the time your request is received, as well as your background.

 

[Mark I]

Very nice. I was an Academic Advisor/Coordinator for 600+ Computer Science Students and the Computer Science Student Veteran Liaison at Florida State University one of the top veteran friendly colleges for a few years to add to my leadership experience. But according to the IW folk that don't mean much. Thoughts? @Mark I

Unfortunately, I can't speak to what the board is looking for in IW officers, but my hunch would be that perhaps IW puts less emphasis than INTEL on the kinds of person-to-person skillsets that come from being an advisor, coordinator, or student liaison (but I'll let someone more knowledgable than I am follow up).

Nonetheless, I personally believe that serving in those kinds of roles provides just as much leadership experience as a business executive at a Fortune 500 cranking out deals (and perhaps more so, depending on how you define "leadership"). I was not prior, have never been downrange in any capacity, have no business experience, and have no federal, law enforcement, or other government experience. The *entire* leadership portion of my resume boiled down to teaching, serving as an undergraduate residential advisor, and being the president of an on-campus student club. So take that for what you will. I just want to put it out there that you can have that kind of resume and still get picked up in 2017.

 

[USNAVY]

Unfortunately, I can't speak to what the board is looking for in IW officers, but my hunch would be that perhaps IW puts less emphasis than INTEL on the kinds of person-to-person skillsets that come from being an advisor, coordinator, or student liaison (but I'll let someone more knowledgable than I am follow up).

Nonetheless, I personally believe that serving in those kinds of roles provides just as much leadership experience as a business executive at a Fortune 500 cranking out deals (and perhaps more so, depending on how you define "leadership"). I was not prior, have never been downrange in any capacity, have no business experience, and have no federal, law enforcement, or other government experience. The *entire* leadership portion of my resume boiled down to teaching, serving as an undergraduate residential advisor, and being the president of an on-campus student club. So take that for what you will. I just want to put it out there that you can have that kind of resume and still get picked up in 2017.

Thanks for your input. I am applying for INTEL this cycle. I am prior enlisted with Navy leadership, substitute teached for a few months, Academic Advisor (Student Veteran Liaison) leadership, and currently in defense contracting for the Navy and supervise analysts / conduct training on our software. However, my Masters degree in Communications is in progress which I know will hurt my chances of selection. My undergrad is in History btw. My goal is to sell my overall experience / character and own in on my leadership experience (12+ years)

 

[Crippy011]

Nope -- given that 1815 and 1825 selectees are literally in the single digits, they are even more selective than 1835. The 1815 and 1825 ensigns i've met have been chief technology officers at major corporations, founders of cyber security firms, GS14+ leaders at civilian agencies doing the exact same jobs in leadership roles, etc. These people are not the exception, they are the norm. As far as CISSP certification goes, many people who are selected earned their CISSP years before applying and had significant experience working with and using the certification for many years. Just earning a certification with no quantifiable experience using the certification won't mean much to the board, FYI.

You can't even get the CISSP without significant work experience (at least the full designation).
I had 5 years right when I passed it and even then, ISC2 scrutinized every position that I listed in my application.
Also, I got my CISSP my second drill weekend. I applied just with my Sec+.

 

[bubblehead]

You can't even get the CISSP without significant work experience (at least the full designation).

(ISC)^2 is a money making machine and their "claims" are a bunch of b.s. The only thing the CISSP certifies is your ability to memorize material to take and to pass a test. A couple of acquaintances, that I would never hire, take these tests for sport. One of the individuals has over 12 certifications. The other is tracking at over 5.

There was a good presentation a few years ago:
http://attrition.org/security/conferences/why_you_should_not_get_a_CISSP-public.pdf

With commentary here:
https://b10w.wordpress.com/2012/08/01/regarding-the-cissp/