Training for Full Spectrum Operations

[Ken White]

Cross posted from the SWJ Blog.

The Information Paper says several things on which the FM does not appear to follow through:

"Change the Army mindset. . . no return to pre-9-11 focus on offense and defense in MCO."

"What has not changed is that we’re still a standards-based force; however, we must think, train, and educate differently to develop agile leaders and an expeditionary force"

In the first case, the FM largely is a pre 9-11 regurgitation. It does offer changes but they are in verbiage and not really so much in training practice. I could not find a single mention of Outcome Based Training. A sad and unbelievable omission. Fortunately, Fort Jackson appears to be ahead of CAC; see "Outcomes-Based warrior Training".

Outcome Based Training emphasizes the development of the individual based on operational expectations; tangible skills, intangible attributes and relatedness of tasks which results in Soldiers, leaders and units who have learned to teach themselves, are able to solve problems as individuals and teams, have realized an increase in intangible attributes and mastery of basic skills.

The FM itself is not the incremental change I had hoped for. I would have like a radical change to the training environment but since I know the Army doesn't do radical I hoped for an incremental change. Didn't really get it. To be sure there are some changes but most add to the training burden...

It seems to me to be an overly wordy document, i think it is too long and has too many redundancies and thus will not be read and used as it should be.

I do not think the FM places nearly enough emphasis on the fostering of initiative and acceptance of innovative solutions by subordinates. For example, Paragraph 2-3 states the Commander is the units primary training manger (true) and primary trainer (wrong) -- he cannot be and that phrasing sends a message that he should strive to do so, thus encouraging micromanagement and deterring delegation and the fostering of initiative. Words are important....

Paragraph 2-42 states "Army training is performed to standard." Having been around at the birth of tasks, conditions and standards as a training regimen and having disagreed vehemently with the concept at the time -- it is a good process for training a hastily mobilized, draftee based Army, it is totally inadequate process for a professional force with higher standards -- and having watched the Army and the process for the subsequent 33 years I remain convinced it is not a good training system.

However, I am glad to note the Army has finally acknowledged that conditions for conduct of a task can vary widely. Now if they'll just realize that the standard can also vary depending on external parameters. That's unfair; most realize that -- should have said if the Army will just acknowledge that...