What promotes selection for top management in the Norwegian Armed Forces? – results from registry data analysis

Leadership is essential for the Norwegian Armed Forces’ (NorAF) goal achievement and operational capability. NorAF is a hierarchical organization where the top management is particularly important in directing the organization. The composition of the top management group may therefore have important implications for NorAFs ability to face its challenges. Selection of managers is therefore crucial. This study explores this topic by investigating selection to NorAF’s top management. Top management is defined as “group 1”, which includes the officer ranks of colonel or captain (navy) and above (OF 5–9). The analysis is based on data from NorAF’s personnel registry from 2004 to 2020. The study explores possible factors that systematically influence selection to group 1. The purpose of the study is to find out more about the factors that are emphasized in the selection process, and the competence profiles of those that are selected. The analysis shows that the typical group 1-officer is characterized by long and broad experience from operative units, management, and staff. International experience is also significant. Furthermore, their experience is characterized by frequent geographical and organizational mobility and mobility across somewhat different functional areas. The analysis also shows that changing positions more frequently than the normative requirement of three years increases the likelihood of promotion, while less frequent change decreases the likelihood. Promotion to OF 3 (major/commander) at a young age increases the likelihood of future promotion to group 1 considerably. At the individual level, experience and competence in group 1 is diverse. As a group, however, those selected for group 1 appear relatively similar in many ways. Because individuals are selected for specific experience and competence, it seems that the selection process narrows down rather than promotes diversity in competencies. If more diversity is desirable, it is probably necessary to further differentiate in terms of the selection criteria for different positions. Furthermore, the analysis shows that the share of women in group 1 is about the same as the share of women among officers in general. Women have had a higher probability of selection to group 1 compared to men, all else being equal. This suggests that the selection process has promoted a more balanced gender composition. Altogether, the results suggest that NorAF largely select according to predetermined criteria. However, the results also show that other factors can have significant impact. For the selection system to be perceived as transparent and fair, it is important that informal criteria do not play a major role. NorAF should also be aware of practices that benefit individual careers may not necessarily benefit NorAF as an organization. For NorAF, it is therefore important to consider individual incentives and career-furthering practices in the context of NorAF’s overall needs.