New Officer Promotion Criteria


There are definitely elements in HQAC (and wider) who believe that uploading something to sharepoint instantly and automatically brings that thing into effect, somehow expecting people to notice this and adapt immediately.

Obviously this is an insane concept but we have all seen it happen. The art of promulgating changes seems to have been lost somewhere and needs to be found again.

The sensible route (I believe) would be for updates and amendments to be prepared on MOSS in draft form, along with the announcement documents and change lists. To roll this out as a “live” document, upload it all to Bader sharepoint and promulgate the changes by email and in other places.

To manage the workload for units, have quarterly roll-outs for changes (except any genuinely urgent ones) and issue a combined amendment list WITH DETAILS OF WHAT HAS CHANGED to all units, directly and via an announcement on SP.


Further info:

I have requested that the Pers Form 2-09A be removed from the Key Documents Area ASAP - I wasn’t aware that was how you find it and can understand how you would believe that this was new policy - this is a change and new learning curve for the HQ Staff as well, so your patience is appreciated whilst they get to grips with the new ways of working

I spoke to ACOS Spt (OC Admin Wg) this morning, going forward, all such documents will be kept in a LTD area in future until they are ‘live’ and ready to be properly implemented.


Hmmm, SharePoint has been in use for at least a decade now… how much more time to HQAC need?? :ohmygod:


It was probably poor internal HQ Staff communication, the new way of working is having the IBNs alongside a policy change.

Doc Owner - Here’s a new form, can you add to SP
iHub - Forms they go to Key Docs…

Remember that the Key Docs can only be uploaded by a limited group of people (iHub) they may have no knowledge of the policy that the document is related too.

The fact that RC(N) has taken on-board the feedback from here & engaged with @pEp and is speaking with the relevant HQ Staff to resolve should be applauded


I don’t think the use of SharePoint is the patience he’s asking for. It’s to do with how they release policy.


It’s good “he’s” taking notice of what is said / happens.

I just hope the same happens with the most recent survey, which he seems to be lead for, and the results get published and then full explanation as to why things are or aren’t done.

It would be good to have the raw data published, before it is analysed.


My bad. :flushed:

The move to IBNs does sound positive.


My worry is that we may be deluged by them as there seems to be a lot of changes all the time.


But that then comes down to document control and explanations as to why it’s being implemented.

One of our old HODs would always question changes and want to know what the benefit would be and how it improves things. He made it to board level and apparently created mayhem as he wouldn’t just do things, without it being explained and rationalised.


If a change cannot be rationalised and explained then I doubt its value.
Justification should be an integral part of the change notification process as it can help to get people on board and go some way to satisfying the whiny malcontents.


The subject of this thread is a good example of what you say.

There can be no justification for it in a volunteer organisation, regardless of the parent organisations procedures and processes.


I recall having this conversation with Will Scott and RC(N) in the early days of SharePoint. We discussed using CROs to promulgate, or monthly summaries via SP. And here we are, 10 years on, revisiting it!!!


I remember similar conversations at OC conferences about promulgation of changes and CROs were the preferred method we wanted and it never happened. The current CAC made noises about keeping us informed, worked for a while, then stopped. I imagine if we could be forced into using FB or Twitter they’d keep us informed that way. I won’t use the closed sqn group as most of what goes on there is ‘noise’.

You feel that while they want to keep us informed in theory they’re not overly keen in practice.

As for revisiting it’s the SOP for HQAC, there are things being discussed now that have been discussed on and off over the last 30 years with no resolution, hence revisits. These will continue to be revisited for as long as the Corps is in existence and even if the Corps folded they will remain largely unresolved. You can see Admin Burden Reduction and Valuing our Volunteers getting rehashed as time goes on.