Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't, even for the surgeon thing, they probably shouldn't be skipping ranks. If the MOS needs a specific level of pay, they should address it by changes to that duty pay and revamping the retirement system to look at that pay too. The automotive executive is a little different since you do what them to oversee everything since they are an industry expert, not just a individual contributor or midlevel manager. Funn…
Docs in the military have a bonus structure based on their specialty area that's supposed to at least try to keep their pay from being ridiculously behind. And the idea behind bringing a surgeon in as an O-5 is that a surgeon has that level of seniority as a medical practitioner, so it aligns with their field. To bring an O-5 cyber person in, they would be expected to have enough experience as a cybersecurity profess…
Tries is the key word there. Most of the time it's not even close unless you're a family practicioner or other lower paid specialty. On the other hand, there is a retirement program (although that's based on base pay and not as great for roles like this) and they don't need mal-practice. At least to me, it seems the biggest way they get docs is to pay for their med school if they commit to 8-12 years or whatever it is for them now.
"To bring an O-5 cyber person in, they would be expected to have enough experience as a cybersecurity professional to rate that rank."
I mean, that makes sense in a general sense, but doesn't really make sense the way it works now. There are plenty of people with experience that if they were external would come in at a higher rank than they are now. I'm not sure how you would design a good system for an industry where people jump companies every 2-3 years, are expecting high pay (at least O5 with 10 years), are used to rapid promotions, and are used to lots of perks. I mean, you could have someone with 5 years of internal experience with a great record be something like O3 and have someone external be called a senior analyst/dev or lead in 3-5 years and come in as an O5 with basically no difference in duties or performance.
Although I'm not sure how you would even measure performance in that role. The industry doesn't have clue how to measure it - just look at the article or all the stuff about interviews and leetcode. The military might set some more objective standards, but they're not going to remotely apply to external candidates.
I don't know, I guess in general I would imagine the best thing for stability, readiness, and even morale, would be to train and promote from within while focusing on retention. It sounds like they're already providing bonuses for all levels and saying they're focusing on retention, but clearly they have other issues. I doubt bringing people in at a higher rank will fix that.