Hail_HYDRA!
One more question...
I have an okay amount of varied professional work experience both domestic and abroad (13+ years) with one B.S., three master degrees, and literally JUST completed the doctorate (all with high GPA scores, well, maybe except for the b.s.). My degree ranges from engineering, business, to predictive analytics and modeling. Be that as it may, I was still a non-select earlier this year for CW.
I really just want to be a naval officer who is competent in their abilities and wise enough to lean on my senior enlisted personnel to progress the mission. Confident in my abilities means commissioning into a leadership role commensurate with my background and education that the Navy could exploit.
Lately, I have read on numerous boards that Intel is the way to go if an applicant wants to increase their odds to get in. I also read this designator is quite overmanned. As stated before, I really want to be a naval officer. I am left wondering will the work be so vastly different in Intel than CW that if I ever considered a lat transfer I would be a fish out of water due to years of being a customer of that data versus being the originator? Or, could I leverage my civilian experience and make the case for it later? Who knows, I may actually love it.
The bottom line, will the board look at my packet with a raised eyebrow if I put intel first and CW second? I really want CW first, but I want to get selected and be a naval officer more. One more detail, I am a GS-14 in D.C. which IMHO does means not much here as GS-14's are like E-9's walking around at US Army Sergeants Major Academy at Ft. Bliss. No diss to any E-9s or GS-14/15, but for those who live in the D.C. area understand it is saturated with 14/15's due to the mindset and structure here so top-heavy. I just feel I'd have more "street cred" if I was like anywhere but here as a 14.
Lastly, it seems like cyber is making its way into many designators (as advertised online) with Intel being one of them. With my background in cyber fraud and process control systems, could my background still be utilized via the Intel route?
I really just want to be a naval officer who is competent in their abilities and wise enough to lean on my senior enlisted personnel to progress the mission. Confident in my abilities means commissioning into a leadership role commensurate with my background and education that the Navy could exploit.
Lately, I have read on numerous boards that Intel is the way to go if an applicant wants to increase their odds to get in. I also read this designator is quite overmanned. As stated before, I really want to be a naval officer. I am left wondering will the work be so vastly different in Intel than CW that if I ever considered a lat transfer I would be a fish out of water due to years of being a customer of that data versus being the originator? Or, could I leverage my civilian experience and make the case for it later? Who knows, I may actually love it.
The bottom line, will the board look at my packet with a raised eyebrow if I put intel first and CW second? I really want CW first, but I want to get selected and be a naval officer more. One more detail, I am a GS-14 in D.C. which IMHO does means not much here as GS-14's are like E-9's walking around at US Army Sergeants Major Academy at Ft. Bliss. No diss to any E-9s or GS-14/15, but for those who live in the D.C. area understand it is saturated with 14/15's due to the mindset and structure here so top-heavy. I just feel I'd have more "street cred" if I was like anywhere but here as a 14.
Lastly, it seems like cyber is making its way into many designators (as advertised online) with Intel being one of them. With my background in cyber fraud and process control systems, could my background still be utilized via the Intel route?