Ben Sloot

Published on 20250416

I spend a good amount of time with our legal team. Their office is down on the first floor of our building, and they’re not just essential to keeping us out of trouble—they’re also quick with a dry, often brilliant sense of humor. Lately, with some of our most senior and insightful legal professionals rotating through, their questions have become more abstract, bigger in scope—and more interesting.

One caught me off guard.

It came from our chief paralegal and centered on the civilian workforce in the Army Reserve. Specifically, what did I think about individuals holding positions for a long time? Did long-term tenure create risk, and were those risks worth the trade-offs?

It’s a great question. And, like many good questions, I didn’t answer it well in the moment.

My First Reaction: The 143d and the Southeast Workforce

When asked, I instinctively brought the question back to what I know best—our workforce at the 143d Expeditionary Sustainment Command. We’ve got 189 civilians spread across 13 southeastern states, supporting nearly 90 subordinate units and over 7,700 Soldiers. That number climbs every day as we adjust force structure and plug vacancies.

Having lived in Orlando for the past year, I understand why people want to stay put in the Southeast. No one wants to hop on a plane to reach a Battle Assembly. But preferences aside, the question still loomed: what are the implications—good and bad—of long-term civilian tenure?

The Power of Continuity

First, let’s be clear: continuity is an asset. Long-serving civilians provide stability as uniformed leaders rotate out every 2–3 years. Institutional knowledge builds over time, and there’s no substitute for repetition when learning a complex job.

I’ve experienced this firsthand. Decoding the Army Reserve Command budget took me years to understand. Long-tenured civilians—who’ve seen funding patterns, execution challenges, and systemic pitfalls play out repeatedly—are invaluable to shaping realistic strategies and keeping our formations moving.

They’re the ones who remember what broke the system last time and how we avoided (or didn’t avoid) disaster. That’s knowledge you can’t teach in a three-day turnover brief.

The Hidden Risk: Overreliance

But continuity can have a downside. A long-standing civilian often becomes the “default” answer to routine or burdensome tasks. Need someone to hold a Government Purchase Card? Ask the civilian. Need an alternate hand receipt holder or an additional duty manager? The civilian will be here longest, so give it to them.

It’s a rational decision, but not always a good one. It burdens key personnel, narrows institutional flexibility, and prevents uniformed staff from gaining experience critical to their professional development.

Worse still, we sometimes justify this lopsided distribution of labor by saying our Soldiers can’t access systems or aren’t around enough to be trained. That argument needs to be challenged.

The Perception of Power

The more nuanced concern raised by our chief paralegal wasn’t just about task saturation or stability. It was about power.

Specifically, when civilians remain in place for years—or decades—they often accumulate far more situational awareness than their rotating military counterparts. This dynamic can create tension, particularly when a civilian is more informed, more experienced, and perhaps more influential than the officer technically in charge.

I’ve seen this. I’ve lived this. And it’s why I constantly remind uniformed staff and commanders: you must lead with humility. You might be in charge on paper, but the person across the table may know far more than you do about the mission, the structure, or the politics.

You’ll only succeed by acknowledging what you don’t know, building partnerships, and treating your civilian teammates as peers, not subordinates.

Cultural Friction and the Need for Onboarding

Without deliberate onboarding and role clarification, these dynamics can breed friction. Misunderstandings about “who’s really in charge” erode trust and disrupt mission focus.

I’ve seen these tensions not only between senior civilians and rotating military supervisors, but also between longstanding junior employees and new leaders. When roles, expectations, and authority are left vague, power struggles tend to fill the vacuum—regardless of pay grade or time in service.

Senior managers must be proactive in onboarding new personnel and setting the tone early. That responsibility starts with me.

A Shifting Landscape: The End of the 35-Year Career?

One of our most respected teammates, Jim Williams, recently retired after 35 years. He was our supervisory IT specialist and key account manager—someone who knew every cable, system, and problem ticket across the facility. His retirement left a huge gap. But here’s the truth: I don’t think I’ll ever see another 35-year tenure in the same role before my own retirement. Not because people are less committed, but because the workforce itself is changing.

Younger employees are more mobile. They’re more likely to chase opportunity, flexibility, or purpose. And we shouldn’t fight that—we should embrace it.

A New Model for Civilian Talent Management

If we want to keep top talent and maximize its impact, we need to manage civilian careers more like we manage military ones. That means:

Structured career paths for our high performers Mobility incentives, like relocation support and targeted bonuses Deliberate placements into high-impact roles—HR, operations, logistics, IT, finance Real succession planning, not just backfilling when someone leaves

We’re already doing this on the uniformed side. We can apply the same principles on the civilian side, just on a slightly slower cycle—say every 5–7 years instead of 2–3. That way, we retain the benefits of continuity without the stagnation or burnout.

And most importantly, we empower our top 20%—the ones who can shape culture, drive performance, and build organizations ready for the future.

Final Thoughts

Tenure is a tool. Like any tool, it’s only effective when used with intent. In today’s Army Reserve, we can’t afford to rely on inertia to shape our teams. We need to shape them actively—by investing in our civilians, aligning talent with mission needs, and reducing the organizational heat through trust, humility, and smart leadership.

That’s where I’ll leave it for today. Thoughts from a morning ride, 7:04 to 7:22 a.m. (dictated/drafted during a morning commute)