> Basically the problem with the military is that they won't (or can't) pay enough to retain any of the talent they have and are unwilling to compensate for the low salary by changing the "culture" they've developed over the last century.
These are all problems that are slowly working their way up the policy chains. E.g. RAND has put out a very good study on all this, http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR430.html that discusses the challenges with public sector/military hiring (and retention).
It may yet have to come down to putting the effort heavily on the Reserves though, because for all the other things the military can change, I don't see culture as being one of them. Even the legendarily free-wheeling communities like submarines and fighter aviation deal with red tape and subsuming egos to the team.
>These are all problems that are slowly working their way up the policy chains.
It doesn't matter that the problems are working their way up the policy chains if they are only going to die when they get to the top. You yourself admitted that they are unlikely to change the culture, and we both know they aren't about to pay a competitive wage to the military. Unfortunately, that leaves us with things exactly the way they are now.
The military likes to talk about starting to take various issues seriously, yet it is an exceptionally rare occasion when they actually do.
In larger tech companies there's plenty of red tape, and some of the best software developers I've seen don't care a lot about ego. People I've heard talk about public sector work (never heard any talk about military software security work) complain more about cultures where there are too many incentives to focus on the narrow mission of your own organizational subunit, and little feeling of (or decision-making with a view towards) the overall goals of the broader organization.
Company red tape and military culture is nothing alike.
The most "conservative" company would have techies that don't meet any customers come in a suit, and those are almost extinct now.
In a military, depending on where you are and your rank, you could detention / penalties for not being shaved, not having your shoes shined, having a haircut that's too long by a few centimeters. You often can't take a week (or even a day) off without weeks notice unless it's an emergency. You could go to jail for disobeying a higher up.
And most importantly, if you signed up for (say) 3 years, you can't quit before those three years are up. Seriously, if you think corporate red tape is anything remotely like serving in the military - you need to revisit your idea of what the military is.
I've been in .mil and .com and with at will employment at least in the more regulated industries its the same outcomes. Whats really different is the formality level.
So if your .com boss decides to fire you for being a dirty hippie, you pretty much get walked out and that's it. More likely they would make up a bunch of B.S. to "prove" your inadequacy so they don't have to pay severance or unemployment claims.
In .mil its surprisingly similar but much more formal. UCMJ article 15 punishments, some written formal counseling, courtmartial trial, yes you can get downsized in the .mil by reorgs making your slot coincidentally happen to disappear, its all very complicated and ritualistic but basically does the same thing as .com.
You only go to jail in .mil if you more or less want to. There are always alternatives that are generally easier than "just say no". Its vaguely similar to .com life in that telling your boss "no" is much more likely to get you fired than explaining "yes, but ...". Along with the traditional homer simpson move of just go to work and retire in place or monkey wrench stuff.
One difference is transferring is much easier and much more uniform in .mil if you have a bad boss than in .com where that may range from no-problemo to impossible without a career death penalty being assessed but usually on average much harder in .com world.
I suspect you misunderstood what I wrote: The army can easily discharge you even if you signed up for 3 years, with a variety of ways. However, YOU cannot quit as easily. That's a world of difference.
And re:transferring - that's another thing that's different in the army; The army can transfer you to, say, Iraq, with a couple of days notice, without giving you the ability to refuse. Ever had anything like that happen in your .com days?
These are all problems that are slowly working their way up the policy chains. E.g. RAND has put out a very good study on all this, http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR430.html that discusses the challenges with public sector/military hiring (and retention).
It may yet have to come down to putting the effort heavily on the Reserves though, because for all the other things the military can change, I don't see culture as being one of them. Even the legendarily free-wheeling communities like submarines and fighter aviation deal with red tape and subsuming egos to the team.