-Caveat Lector- Soldiers For The Truth, June 28, 1999 COMBAT REPORT ON LEADERSHIP By Donald E. Vandergriff, Major, US Army Ten Solutions for a Better 21st Century Army AT THE DAWN of the 21st Century we need to ask "what do we need from our military personnel system?" There is plenty of historical evidence, and examples, that the system by which soldiers are recruited, trained, rewarded, disciplined, assigned and replaced can multiply an army's "fighting power." The personnel system is the foundation of an army's culture. To meet the demands of 21st Century combat, we require soldiers who will be products of a system that continually challenges their capacity for growth and encourages them to master all aspects of their tactical environment rather than restricting them to the mindless repetiton of a narrow group of tasks. Innovative soldiers will have had sufficient training experiences to enable them to understand their unit's mission and how to contribute to it. Because of stability in the unit, soldiers will know their leaders well, will know what the leaders have in mind, or how they would want something done, even when a leader is unable to direct. Such units will have the natural synergy of a veteran team. With this in mind, because the first priority of any army is its wartime function, the army should begin building a new personnel system by showing its elements at work in combat, instead of reworking policies that have been proven to fail. A total cultural revolution beginning with the personnel system is needed. I present the following recommendations to the new Chief of Staff of the Army, General Shinseki to build a new culture that will prepare the Army for wartime success in the 21st Century. FIRST, the Chief of Staff of the Army should write a letter to the Army revealing the results of the 1997 "Leadership and Professional Assessment" study and admit there are historical and statistically based proof that there are problems with the personnel system. The letter should denounce careerism, and refocus thre Army on warfighting. SECOND, bring to Washington, DC, soldiers of all ranks, but especially those who are known as "mavericks," who have published controversial articles, or pieces that challenge conventional wisdom and convene a symposium to study how to improve the Army. Publish the recommendations so soldiers and the public will know what the Army is going to do. THIRD, revisit the New Manning System (NMS) from the 1980s and implement it completely to include the involvement of officers. People will remember this as COHORT (Cohesion Operational Readiness Training). Its downfall was that it was a small part of a larger personnel system that favored individual replacement and centralized control. FOURTH, the core of the new personnel system must become the primacy of the unit. This means units, not individuals, should be moved whenever possible. We should choose unit temporary duty (TDY) and unit deployments (like the Marines and Navy) as the Army response to a mission that requires movement of forces. Units should be ordered to move, not as a tailored slice, but as an entire unit. Schools should be decentralized and travel, whenwever possible, to the unit to give their instruction. FIFTH, to ensure cohesive units in combat stop changing task organizations for every mission. This "tinkering" undermines unit cohesion. As Col. Doug MacGregor recommends in his book, Breaking the Phalanx, establish permanent battalion task forces. This also means stop continual organizational changes in DCSOPS every time a general or action officer changes position. An indefinite freeze in force development is impractical, new weapons may require new kinds of units. Apart from doctrinal or equipment driven initiatives, the Army needs to look on changes in unit design with caution. This will lead to more stability and make it easier for units to move as units and exchange their mission with other units, and also reduce the growth variations of unit designs. SIXTH, and perhaps the hardest, due to our culture's penchant for centralization and efficienty -- decentralize the personnel system -- while embracing and practicing "a power-down" philosophy. This would break up PERSCOM's power and prevent them from undermining the NMS, as they did with COHORT in the 1980s. Put promotions/selections back in the hands of regimental/brigade commanders/and senior NCOs. "Power-down" should extend to giving power back to squad/crew leaders/ platoon sergeants in deciding on leaves, passes, and soldier discipline, giving the soldier's direct supervisor great power. SEVENTH, lead the other services in reforming DOPMA (Defense Officers Personnel Management Act) 1980. DOPMA is the son of OPA 47. Both were created by Congress for a Cold War military worried about mobilization for World War III. Both embraced the "up-or-out" promotion system, the "all-or-nothing" 20-year retirement system, and a bloated officer cirps at the middle and senior grades. A combination of these three have created a careerist and risk-averse officer corps. EIGHTH, change the way we measure combat readiness--get rid of the Unit Status Report and its emphasis on "statisical readiness." Start measuring potential commanders/leaders on how their units perform in unit force-on-force evaluations. This process will look at team versus individual output. We should have a culture that embraces team and not individual competition. The current personnel system fosters the damaging "competitive ethic" which undercuts trust among brother officers. NINTH, along with NMS create a true regimental system with units that are affiliated with particular regions of the country. These units will recruit, train and home base units, their soldiers and dependents in that region. A atrue regimental system also would strengthen the "one-Army" concept of tying the Ntional Guard/Reserves to the Active component. (For a possible model, Gen. Donn Starry, former TRADOC Commander, developed a regimental plan that would work for the U.S. aRMY. TENTH, be straightforward with Congress, soldiers and the public so that all will understand that these changes are necessary to bring about full military effectiveness. This means changing our message in recruiting commercials and advertisements which are structured to bring in soldiers on short-term incentives. Recruit by emphasizing nationalistic service, pride and the warrior ethic. Stop throwing money at the problem. # # # # # # # # # # SFTT welcomes your response to this article. Let us know what you think. Send your answer to Don Vandergriff at [EMAIL PROTECTED] **COPYRIGHT NOTICE** In accordance with Title 17 U. S. C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for nonprofit research and educational purposes only.[Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ] DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
