View Full Version : Metric Assessments in the Advisor World
I'll be taking an adviser team to Afg in the spring time and I'm having a hard time figuring out one of the key tenets of COIN success or failure, how to assess progress.
As the adviser to an ANA Bn Cmdr and an ANA Bn as a whole I'm trying to figure out how to know if we are making progress to an end state of the ANA operating on their own with little to no CF support.
I don't think just talking it over with my Marines and saying yes or no they're getting better is necessarily the right answer, or is it? I'm not trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill but I want to make an honest evaluation of how these guys are progressing.
I know my E/S is ANA able to conduct operations on their own. That's a given. I have a rep for each staff function, S-1 through S-6. The hard thing I'm trying to figure out what exactly are effective measures of effectiveness?
I've done some a little Google research. Unfortunately alot of the stuff I have found on the net is conceptual and academic, information that makes for a good EWS discussion. My next stop is the CALL. In the interim though I'm open to suggestions and dialogue on what others experiences have been.
Thanks again for the help,
If in the wrong forum I apologize in advance. I know this one gets the most interest
03-24-2012, 05:52 PM
Sorry, just reread your post and realize I was originally trying to answer a different question. Given the way IJC constantly reorganizes itself I can't say exactly what team there is working this effort. I do know someone there is tracking it, but every time a new O-6 or O-7 arrives they have this tendency to change the process all around. It's a lot like how John Paul Vann described Vietnam as a 10-year war being fought ten different times, one year at a time.
My best advice, regardless of how you do this, treat what ever data you come across very skeptically. The ANA most certainly cooks the books. Senior officers have this tendency to exaggerate manning levels so they can pocket the excess salary.
03-24-2012, 06:09 PM
Surely there is some help available from the US experience in South Vietnam, Iraq and other places that can offer metrics (an issue that has appeared here before)?
I know one Iraq veteran is studying the adviser experience in South Vietnam and Iraq, so will drop them a line.
PM also en route.
03-24-2012, 06:17 PM
You want real, hard fast stuff for Evaluating Kandaks? We'll you're not really going to find it. As an Army guy, currently deployed with a Partnership mission, I could tell you how we are doing it, and how we SHOULD be doing it. (In my humble opinion of course).
Every week you will fill out a report, provided to you, that assesses this sort of thing. You go over their Tashkhil, which is the biggest part of it. In the Army, we have METL tasks. I could consider developing that for your Kandak, and your Tolis (Coys). Battle Tracking, Self Recovery, Reporting, Logistics. Write out what all those tasks are, and after two weeks, give them a untrained, trained, proficient rating. The hard thing, is to distinguish between seeing it work once well, and seeing a true system of success in place, that they will be able to continue on. I've got to work with a Great Kandak, and one that was "meh", which got up to okay. (would independently launch recovery operations etc). The CUAT is the biggest thing. have you got your centrix email up yet?
Thanks for the help.
I'm attending the COIN academy this week. I'm not holding my breath though. I've herad these courses are good for conceptual but a little light on execution recommendations.
Not sure if you've given this a read... certainly can't hurt !
The Failed Metrics of Ten Years of War at CSIS (http://csis.org/publication/afghanistan-failed-metrics-ten-years-war)
03-27-2012, 02:19 AM
The metric you will most need to be familiar with is the CUAT process, kind of a USR for the ANA. However, it does not measure performance and under-rates many tactical units because logistical shortfalls are often out of their control (Kabul issues), but are able to execute missions well.
For example, 1/205 ANA recently executed Mi-17 flown Air Assaults, planned, coordinated, and rehearsed by them. They did it very well. They are able to do Brigade level planning. However, like all ANA, equipment, maintenance, and supply shortfalls hold them back. But they are able to take it to the Taliban effectively.
The subjective assessment you will make as an adviser, backed up by your battlespace owning unit, will be the real metric your embedded unit will be based upon.
04-05-2012, 04:35 AM
As I understand it you are tracking the usr I mean cuat and all that implies. One key implication is when it's on the timeline to raise readiness you will Iaw higher. So developing your own metrics will be important to you to include subjectively. Most of the data that would be indicative is hard to come by and harder to validate. Best of luck savor each success
Thanks for the feedback. After burning some significant brain cells I think we've come up with a quasi system in place to assess how the ANA is doing/improving.
Once we come up with something I'll be sure to post here for feedback.
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2013, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.