Conus Support Team??

[Rob Thornton]

I copied this out of an email response I wrote - I've been considering the roles of HSOCs for about a year now. Then today I got the idea of being able to access a CST (CONUS Support Team)- The President said he was looking for ways for the more professionals to help - this would provide support to commanders & staffs by people who might not wish or be able to deploy, but were desiring or willing to help. The teams might be ADHOC, they may change, they may be temporary, but that would be OK, maybe even desirable since you want more professionals who have experiences in addition to their qualifications, not just smart people with a degree. It would have to be managed by somebody, but imagine the flexibility! You could even bill some of it as a USG internship. I don't think you'd want career CST types unless it was a second career or in additon to their day job. A guy like Marc would be perfect as he already donates a great deal of his time and is having a positive impact on operations here (yes Marc - I've stlen everything you've offered up in one form or another to help the mission and those pursuing the mission if I've not told you and the rest of the SWC - thanks!). Most communities could support something like this - maybe we should run an add in some paper somewhere, establish a group leader and marry them up with a unit?

Thoughts?? What kind of professionals would be useful? What kind of experiences would be beneficial to those skill sets? What kind might not be? How would the group be involved? Would you need a leader and what kind of person might that be. Somebody could do this, and do it right - it could be a USG organization, or it could be a contractor - both have pluses and minuses.

This email actually started as a discussion on Aided Decision Making software (Selil probably has some good thoughts on that one as well) - iworked allot with these concepts back at Knox when I working FCS in the Battle Lab - I never thought the acronym GUI (pronounced "Gooey" for Graphic User Interface) would be in my lexicon

Aided decision Making tools are still being developed and pushed - a study awhile back by RAND on cognitive readiness deterimined that people could only do so much, and while that is sort of a blinding flash of the obvious - some people have to be told its OK to have limits. The development community then hit upon the idea of using intuitive software to aid in decision superiority. The problem is though that computer work in input/out put either by a program or by new user information. Computer analysis of somethings are better then others; things with physical properties such as routes (hydrology, geological features - gradient, soil composition, time distance stuff etc meshed with how long you have to get some where and what you are trying to move - can be useful, but computers dealing with people gets messy (except in a computer simulation where the people are run by the machine). People do crazy things like stuff other people in rice sacks.
I worry a bit that the Army will cut a corner somewhere - because we always try to invest in technology vs. people. I'm not arguing for mongoso deployable staffs, but I do think our guys need better educational development earlier, and that we could supplement them with a HSOC (Home Station Operations Command) like organization- for every deploying MSC that is staffed so that a group of professionals with skills unavailable in the staff - anthropologists, sociolgists, psychologists, etc. Call it 3 x 8 hour shifts that these guys would be colocated where they could brainstorm and act as an adjunct to the staff. They would not have to be on a specific post, but it would be preferable if they were in the same city and could travel to the same physical location. They could begin supporting a specific MSC at its alert so it could be part of the mission prep and establish relationships. Then it would take it all the way through its deployment.
If a new unit is set to RIP with the unit redeploying, it may be more beneficial for that unit to fall in on the HSOC (you know a better term for this might be CST - Conus Support Team) since that CST is now very familiar with the METT-TC (Mission, Enemy, Terrain, Troops, Time, Civilian) components of that geographical area. There would be some security issues, but let the contracting agency do the hiring and providing the secure location - could be on any allied military base. What's great about the US is we have a diverse and educated population, although if you wanted I suppose you could go outside of the US as long as you could deal with the security issues.

[Rob Thornton]

A couple of other thoughts occured as I was doing PT (yes we have made us a gym here - although we had to steal all the equipment - you have to stay in physical shape to sustain mental and emotional strength)

1) Marc had said awhile back that allot of the scientific community is turned off by the military. Even if we got some of the folks we'd like, it'd still be very beneficial to have them able to interact with their peers outside the
group(s) - this means an IO message that says, "we're not here to exploit your work to further an empire, rather we want to avoid misunderstandings, needless bloodshed, shorten conflicts and improve things." We have to change the perception of what we do by a very important part of our society.

2)These CSTs should be networked into a CoP so that what is relevant in one area can be applied to the context of other areas. Part of this is knowing what works for others, but also what is not working for others and why.

3) We have a sort of model here on the SWC, although maybe not all the skills we'd like. However, this CoP and some of the Blogs that we're linked to provide free advice, intel, research, etc. that a CST could make use of.

What would such a team look like? How many is just right (not too big, not too small). Is shift work a good idea where they could always be available - is it sustainable? Would the additional requirements be a shift leader? Would shift leaders report to a team leader? I think the number of AD military needs to be kept small or maybe 0 - they'd be more of an advisory role if anything - however, such and assignment would stimulate innovative thinking and expose AD to things outside their normal experiences.

If you used contractors, you might not get the "public service" effect the President spoke of, and it would not be cheap - there would also be artificial metrics of "what have you produced lately?" which in my mind emphsizes quantity over quality. Maybe there is a hybrid to be had. Or maybe we just need to start a new agency/service that serves as an adjunct to DoD (because they would be the primary benficiary)

[marct]

Hi Rob,

I copied this out of an email response I wrote - I've been considering the roles of HSOCs for about a year now. Then today I got the idea of being able to access a CST (CONUS Support Team)- The President said he was looking for ways for the more professionals to help - this would provide support to commanders & staffs by people who might not wish or be able to deploy, but were desiring or willing to help.

In general, I think it would be a good idea for a couple of reasons. First, it takes advantage of one of our strengths, which is distributed operations. Second, I think it might relieve some of the popular frustration with the way both current wars (Afghanistan and Iraq) are being handled.

Let me clarify that last reason. I think that many people, at least in Canada and, I am sure in the US as well, are frustrated because "we" (civilians) can't "do" anything. Many of us feel similar to what 120mm expressed in his comments about charities. We are paying for these wars via our taxes, told how important they are, and then told "leave it to the professionals" - this isn't exactly conducive to getting people motivated . So, this strategy is more closely allied to 120mm's strategy of dealing with charities - invest time and money in something you choose and check out.

The teams might be ADHOC, they may change, they may be temporary, but that would be OK, maybe even desirable since you want more professionals who have experiences in addition to their qualifications, not just smart people with a degree. It would have to be managed by somebody, but imagine the flexibility! You could even bill some of it as a USG internship. I don't think you'd want career CST types unless it was a second career or in additon to their day job. A guy like Marc would be perfect as he already donates a great deal of his time and is having a positive impact on operations here (yes Marc - I've stlen everything you've offered up in one form or another to help the mission and those pursuing the mission if I've not told you and the rest of the SWC - thanks!). Most communities could support something like this - maybe we should run an add in some paper somewhere, establish a group leader and marry them up with a unit?

Hey, Rob, you can't "steal" what's offered as a gift . I hope some of it has been usefull.

1) Marc had said awhile back that allot of the scientific community is turned off by the military. Even if we got some of the folks we'd like, it'd still be very beneficial to have them able to interact with their peers outside the group(s) - this means an IO message that says, "we're not here to exploit your work to further an empire, rather we want to avoid misunderstandings, needless bloodshed, shorten conflicts and improve things." We have to change the perception of what we do by a very important part of our society.

I think that that is a really good point, Rob. BTW, some of the "turn off" is from a feeling of inadequacy and some of it is from the difficulties in bridging the different worldviews. In order to get the ball up and rolling, probably the best strategy would be to concentrate on the same terrain as the NGOs - e.g. the flying hospitals, relief work, etc.

It would e a fairly hard sell to get support teams for the current wars, although probably easier for Afghanistan than Iraq. The easiest would be for operations in the Horn of Africa.

2)These CSTs should be networked into a CoP so that what is relevant in one area can be applied to the context of other areas. Part of this is knowing what works for others, but also what is not working for others and why.

3) We have a sort of model here on the SWC, although maybe not all the skills we'd like. However, this CoP and some of the Blogs that we're linked to provide free advice, intel, research, etc. that a CST could make use of.

Good idea. Personally, I think that the backbone product should be something like wikipedia. That way if your unit is going to be deployed to, say, the Kenyan border to cordon off Islamists coming out of Somalia, you could get decent background information and a contact for a CST thatis specializing in the area.

What would such a team look like?....

If you used contractors, you might not get the "public service" effect the President spoke of, and it would not be cheap - there would also be artificial metrics of "what have you produced lately?" which in my mind emphsizes quantity over quality. Maybe there is a hybrid to be had. Or maybe we just need to start a new agency/service that serves as an adjunct to DoD (because they would be the primary benficiary)

Let me toss out an alternative organizational model. First, there would be three levels of CST "membership" and access:

1. People who have a basic security clearance from any Coalition and/or NATO country and, really, only have access to the wiki and the board. There should be a simple application form for this, and remuneration should be minimal - maybe a tax write off and a small honourarium. Ideally, students would also have some potential to access this as well (think recruiting <evil grin>).
2. People who wish to become either area or unit support specialists - similar to your original formulation, Rob. Now we are starting to talk about a fair amount of time, so the trade off between "public service" and remuneration gets to be tricky. The types of people we are talking about are, probably, going to be able to command a pretty good salary, so the motivational factor has to take that into account. I would suggest a three fold recruiting strategy: a tax break (maybe a 150% deductible "Gift" category); some basic type of remuneration; and, finally, some type of conference or convention with status recognition perks. You might be able to get away with the status recognition by itself, but only if there is some tie into people's income (take a look at the Microsoft MVP program for a really good example of this).
3. A small core, including some AD people, who manage the backbone of the program and are responsible for "selling it" both inside the forces and in the civilian world.

Honestly, I would not use contractors for this - it's too expensive and goes against the "public service" element. Where you might use contractors is for the background checks - in the same manner as third party recruiters. Still and all, I'd advise against it.

One final point - the name. Now, this may just be a pet rock of mine (to grab Steve's term) but, as a Canadian nationalist, I really dislike he CONUS part of the acronym. I wold suggest that you change the "C" to mean "Coalition". Besides that, it gives you a bigger pool to draw on and is more likely to get people who have different worldviews.

Marc

[Rob Thornton]

Hey Marc,

One final point - the name. Now, this may just be a pet rock of mine (to grab Steve's term) but, as a Canadian nationalist, I really dislike he CONUS part of the acronym. I wold suggest that you change the "C" to mean "Coalition". Besides that, it gives you a bigger pool to draw on and is more likely to get people who have different worldviews.

Concur - it is a Global War and would benefit from non-centric, expanded views available from partners. It would also place it above politics in some regards, since everyone is a stakeholder (although some may not realize it yet).

The easiest would be for operations in the Horn of Africa.

How about we consider a task organization for this AOR? Africa is something Stan and Tom know allot about. It offers up tribal/clan type challenges. It has plenty of agricultural, educational, diplomatic (includes the potential challenges posed by other players), medical, security, governmental, economic/buisness, cultural, logistics and the list goes on kind of challenges. It looks like AFRICOM will happen, and it looks like it will be increasingly important as the future progesses.

[slapout9]

Tom Odom revived the "Pet Rock" craze. I am going to try and talk him into creating a "Guerrilla Warfare Rock" for officers. If the officer doesn't get it! a wild young buck sergeant will throw the rock at him and say read the back. Of course on the back will be Tom Odom's principles of Guerrilla Warfare.

[marct]

Tom Odom revived the "Pet Rock" craze. I am going to try and talk him into creating a "Guerrilla Warfare Rock" for officers. If the officer doesn't get it! a wild young buck sergeant will throw the rock at him and say read the back. Of course on the back will be Tom Odom's principles of Guerrilla Warfare.

Love it! What a great "fundraising" idea for the SWJ!!!!

Marc

[marct]

How about we consider a task organization for this AOR? Africa is something Stan and Tom know allot about. It offers up tribal/clan type challenges. It has plenty of agricultural, educational, diplomatic (includes the potential challenges posed by other players), medical, security, governmental, economic/buisness, cultural, logistics and the list goes on kind of challenges. It looks like AFRICOM will happen, and it looks like it will be increasingly important as the future progesses.

Sounds like a plan to me, and it would probably be one of the best areas to start in. The main potential hitch I see with starting on it is in the area of resources. I do have server space, and I can get more, but it's not secure. I don't know enough about the vBulletin software to know if we can get a private group area set up (SWJED???).

On the plus side, there is a lot of information on Africa. I think it might be a good idea to look at the Horn area to start. This area has a long history of study and activity by NGOs as well, so it would have a good "draw".

Marc