I think a better solution is to SLOW the personnel process, not speed it up. If you make a thirty year career the standard, then you can insure that you get mature, experienced, intelligent leaders at the top. Instead, we ID guys after three or four years as "potential" leaders, then send those same guys to school at the 8-9 year mark. After that, the only significant thing they will do is make a pit stop at SQ/CC a few years later. They're usually hurried out of that job so they can get a better one in order to compete for GP/CC a couple of years later, then WG/CC then perhaps a general officer billet. They spend very little time in any leadership position, spending many of those years in school. Learning what? Whatever the current flavor of academia is. The real problem is identifying those guys in the first three or four years. If you don't get "picked," then you can kiss below the zone promotions goodbye, in-residence schools as well. Command becomes almost impossible and good guys are forced out at 20 years after filling some ridiculous staff job in the last few years of their careers. A 30 year career gives the real cream a chance to rise to the top rather than just guessing at it. If you miss the initial "anointment" phase, then it's almost impossible to get it later on.

Disclaimer: No sour grapes here. I was promoted to 0-4 with an in-residence IDE slot. I was working at the USAF WPS at the time, and was lined up on the inside track when I got out. I have no axe to grind, as I feel if I had stayed in I would have benefited from the system as it currently is.