FY 18 IWC DCO BOARD

[FormerRecruitingGuru]

It's important to let new potential accessions know before they start the process because some will not be able to make the time commitment.

Agreed but the issue you're going to run with some reserve officer recruiters is them potentially losing 18XX applicants and not disclosing that detail to them.

 

[bubblehead]

I don't think my OR has mentioned that to me yet but I heard about it in December (before I even talked to a recruiter) from my O6 contact who is in the 182x community. I wonder if its an all-at-once sort of thing or if you can piecemeal it a bit...as I recall he said it had to be done in the first two or three years.

The course is not piecemeal. It is the active duty course that is full time.

 

[bubblehead]

Agreed but the issue you're going to run with some reserve officer recruiters is them potentially losing 18XX applicants and not disclosing that detail to them.

"Tough gazungas" as they say. You have to be honest with applicants on the expectations, otherwise they are going be surprised when presented with a page 13 that they have to sign stating they will attend the active duty course or bust.

For 182X's there are literally no exceptions/waivers to attending IP Basic unless someone has significant military comms experience. And this would have to receive approval at the flag level.

 

[fieldrat]

given that 1815 and 1825 selectees are literally in the single digits, they are even more selective than 1835.

I was 1 of 7 selects (1815) in the FY16 board.

Based on new requirements just one year later, I likely would not be wearing bars; had some gaps academically that never came up in conversation. Plus, I'm not the CEO/Asst. Under-Secretary/Vice Prez/Founding anything (yet).

 

[bubblehead]

Nope -- given that 1815 and 1825 selectees are literally in the single digits, they are even more selective than 1835.

They have so many applicants that they have to rack and stack them somehow based on certificates, degrees, etc. None of these will make you more or less successful. Funny enough, they say that for 1835 applicants that "foreign languages" make you more competitive, despite the fact that you will not use your language capabilities as a Reserve 1835. When I was an 1835 I met so many people who spoke other languages (Russian, Farsi, Arabic, etc.) who were disappointed that they were not able to use them.

I was commissioned as an 1835 and, after I was fully qualified as an 1835 and IWCO (our warfare pin) I changed my designator to 1825. When I changed my designator, there was not "board" that rack and stacks you like the DCO process. They look at manning numbers, your package (resume, FITREPs, letter explaining "why"), and your ability to succeed in the designator.

I was no where near being competitive for 1825 as a DCO, but here I am in the designator doing just fine and going up for O4.

 

[Bmore84]

I talked to previous board selection member. Word is the ideal candidate is 29-33 years old, 5-6 year experience at an Intel agency, one STEM degree and one IR/Poli-sci degree (masters or bachelors for either, but one of each), prior-Navy service as an IS or CT, ground and sea deployment as an IS or CT, experience as an LPO. He said each rotation they are showing an increased desire for engineering degrees. Again, this is their ideal picture of a candidate for 1835 Intel. Apparently Poli-sci, national security and IR degrees are becoming played out or less relevant. This makes sense because traditional strategic analysis at agencies is becoming less and less relevant, analysts that can speak engineering or network engineering seems to be where the growth area is at just about everywhere. Strategic analysis is always going to be around, but the opportunities are extremely limited these days and the Navy seems to be following suit with their Intel officers.

 

[exNavyOffRec]

I talked to previous board selection member. Word is the ideal candidate is 29-33 years old, 5-6 year experience at an Intel agency, one STEM degree and one IR/Poli-sci degree (masters or bachelors for either, but one of each), prior-Navy service as an IS or CT, ground and sea deployment as an IS or CT, experience as an LPO. He said each rotation they are showing an increased desire for engineering degrees. Again, this is their ideal picture of a candidate for 1835 Intel. Apparently Poli-sci, national security and IR degrees are becoming played out or less relevant. This makes sense because traditional strategic analysis at agencies is becoming less and less relevant, analysts that can speak engineering or network engineering seems to be where the growth area is at just about everywhere. Strategic analysis is always going to be around, but the opportunities are extremely limited these days and the Navy seems to be following suit with their Intel officers.

that is interesting considering if you look at those traditional selected they do not meet that age range, 30's is typically the low end of the age picked up.

 

[fieldrat]

Agreed but the issue you're going to run with some reserve officer recruiters is them potentially losing 18XX applicants and not disclosing that detail to them.

Also, (potential) applicants should seek out and carefully read the relevant program authorization(s). Want to know the standard to which you're being held? Find the NAVADMIN/BUPINST/Program Auth. and open it up. Everything you need is right there. If you still have questions....

Ask your OR.

 

[exNavyOffRec]

Also, (potential) applicants should seek out and carefully read the relevant program authorization(s). Want to know the standard to which you're being held? Find the NAVADMIN/BUPINST/Program Auth. and open it up. Everything you need is right there. If you still have questions....

Ask your OR.

I would just be aware that the Program Authorization gives the MINIMUM requirements, the OR should be able to give tangible data on what type of profile is actually being selected.

 

[Bmore84]

I also encourage people to consider other services. The Army in particular is looking to drastically increase its Intel, CBRN, psy ops and civil affairs reserve officer corps. The Navy is a part of who I am and I deployed for 9 years straight, from a destroyer in Japan to on the ground in Africa/Afghan/Iraq. I love the Navy, but my primary motivator is to serve again as an officer. The Army requires everyone to attend Army OCS. I'd love to continue my service in the Navy and give something back to the service that gave me so much, but I am not getting any younger.

that is interesting considering if you look at those traditional selected they do not meet that age range, 30's is typically the low end of the age picked up.

That's what he told me the "ideal" candidate looks like. The concern being getting someone at that age, so the Navy can get a lot of years out of them.

 

[bubblehead]

I talked to previous board selection member. Word is the ideal candidate is 29-33 years old, 5-6 year experience at an Intel agency, one STEM degree and one IR/Poli-sci degree (masters or bachelors for either, but one of each), prior-Navy service as an IS or CT, ground and sea deployment as an IS or CT, experience as an LPO. He said each rotation they are showing an increased desire for engineering degrees. Again, this is their ideal picture of a candidate for 1835 Intel. Apparently Poli-sci, national security and IR degrees are becoming played out or less relevant. This makes sense because traditional strategic analysis at agencies is becoming less and less relevant, analysts that can speak engineering or network engineering seems to be where the growth area is at just about everywhere. Strategic analysis is always going to be around, but the opportunities are extremely limited these days and the Navy seems to be following suit with their Intel officers.

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.

 

[Bmore84]

Once again, this is what I was told an "ideal" candidate looks like, it doesn't mean that only people with these background make it.

 

[Bmore84]

Also, as others have stated the competitiveness for 1835 has escalated to almost absurd levels. People who've made it in through in the past, might not be able to make it through today because of the competition.

 

[exNavyOffRec]

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.

Who were getting picked up say 10 years ago are not who they are picking up now, and I agree I have seen 1835's who were school teachers, sales, etc that are currently serving, of course those are also the ones who years later were saying they would never get picked up on a current board because the standards have changed.

It is really no different than what I have seen in the civilian sector, I was talking to a recruiter asking what I needed to get hired as a recruiter at where he worked, even though the job description said nothing about a PHR he said flat out if you don't have a PHR you won't be considered, he didn't have one, but he said things had changed and the quality of candidates had increased so the bar had increased as well.

 

[FormerRecruitingGuru]

I talked to previous board selection member. Word is the ideal candidate is 29-33 years old, 5-6 year experience at an Intel agency, one STEM degree and one IR/Poli-sci degree (masters or bachelors for either, but one of each), prior-Navy service as an IS or CT, ground and sea deployment as an IS or CT, experience as an LPO. He said each rotation they are showing an increased desire for engineering degrees. Again, this is their ideal picture of a candidate for 1835 Intel. Apparently Poli-sci, national security and IR degrees are becoming played out or less relevant. This makes sense because traditional strategic analysis at agencies is becoming less and less relevant, analysts that can speak engineering or network engineering seems to be where the growth area is at just about everywhere. Strategic analysis is always going to be around, but the opportunities are extremely limited these days and the Navy seems to be following suit with their Intel officers.

This board member might have sat on a board years ago. The 29-33 age window is very inaccurate.