Evaluation of Warrant Officers
B–1. Overview
a. Warrant officer description.
Warrant officers are self-aware and adaptive technical experts, combat leaders, trainers, and advisors.
Through progressive levels of expertise in assignments, training, and education, the warrant officer administers, manages, maintains, operates, and integrates Army systems and equipment across the full range of Army operations.
Warrant officers are innovative integrators of emerging technologies, dynamic teachers, confident Warfighters, and developers of specialized teams of Soldiers.
They support a wide range of Army missions throughout their careers.
When assessing performance and potential, the rating chain will recognize the basic differences between warrant officers and commissioned officers.
This appendix describes the differences, policies, and instructions to consider when evaluating warrant officers.
b. Warrant officer definition.
An officer appointed by warrant (or by commission to the chief warrant grades) by the Secretary of Defense, based on a sound level of technical and tactical competence.
The warrant officer is the highly-specialized expert and trainer who, by gaining progressive levels of expertise and leadership, operates, maintains, administers, and manages the Army’s equipment, support activities, or technical systems for an entire career.
B–2. Warrant officer evaluation considerations
Warrant officers are comparable to commissioned officers in that both are technically and tactically competent and are authorized to perform similar functions (such as commanding a station, unit, or detachment; certifying vouchers; administering oaths; disbursing funds; and imposing discipline).
Despite these similarities, the professional development, use, and evaluation of warrant officers is different from those of commissioned officers.
Warrant officers are appointed to serve in technical MOSs.
Thus, their professional development is aimed at increasing competence in their specialties.
B–3. DA Form 67–10 series
The basic forms used to evaluate commissioned officers and warrant officers are the same.
There are, however, some differences.
a. Part III.
Enter the MOS of the warrant officer’s principal duty in part III, block b.
If this entry is not the same as the primary MOS or is an additional MOS held by the warrant officer, refer to the HQDA career management approval in part III, block c.
b. Part IV.
The rater will compare the rated officer’s performance and professionalism with attributes and competencies established within the Leadership Requirements Model that apply to all officers regardless of rank or duty position (see ADP/ADRP 6–22).
c. Parts V and VI.
These are the same for warrant officers and commissioned officers.
Warrant officers, however, will also be rated on their potential for the technical positions in which they are qualified and not those positions with responsibilities outside their specialties.
Referenced Paragraphs
ADP/ADRP 6–22
The Leadership Requirements Model establishes the attributes and competencies that apply to all officers regardless of rank or duty position and is used by raters to compare the rated officer’s performance and professionalism.