Military Staff

[AmericanPride]

I'm thinking of doing a research project into military staff systems. I want to look at the strengths and weaknesses of our system (which, as far as I know, is more or less standard internationally) with past and present systems. I've only found a handful of books that specifically discuss the functions of a staff system. I don't have any hands on experience with staff (yet), so any guidance, especially personal experience, would be welcome. Thanks.

[CR6]

unless it was an academic endeavor. I have spent the majority of my professional life as a staff officer and it is neither fun nor interesting. The only saving grace is that if it is done right (knowing that you work for the best interests of the line) it can make life easier for soldiers. Variations of that statement are bandied about to the point of it being a cliche, but that doesn't make it less true.

I've only found a handful of books that specifically discuss the functions of a staff system.

Have any of these made it to your list of secondary souces?

The Enlightened Soldier: Scharnhorst and the Militarische Gesellschaft in Berlin, 1801-1805
by Charles Edward White

Understanding the Prussian-German General Staff system by Christian O. E Millotat

The Politics of the Prussian Army: 1640-1945 by Gordon A. Craig

The Right Hand of Command: Use and Disuse of Personal Staffs in the American Civil War by R. Steven Jones

Reorganizing the Joint Chiefs of Staff (The Goldwater-Nichols Act of 1986) by Gordon Nathaniel Lederman

The Chief of Staff: The Military Career of General Walter Bedell Smith by D.K.R. Crosswell

Buff Facings and Gilt Buttons: Staff and Headquarters Operations in the Army of Northern Virginia, 1861-1865 by J. Boone Bartholomees

[AmericanPride]

Thanks CR.

I'm doing it for an academic project at MIOBC. I've found the Millotat and Craig books, and one another. Thanks for the sources.

I have spent the majority of my professional life as a staff officer and it is neither fun nor interesting.

Part of my intent is to identify why this experience exists as it does. Off-hand, AFAIK staff officers were relatively prestigous in the 18/19th century Prussian system for example.

[patmc]

American Pride,

If you can solve the staff problem and make it fun and interesting (CR6: Sir, you are correct in your assessment), you will be a king among men.

I am at the CCC, currently learning MDMP. If you want to see the Army staff process, come upstairs and watch a squad of Captains learning FM 5-0. It is all smiles.

I recommend you spend your time here learning MI and about your role as a LT. Commanders and the staff will expect you to be the intelligence expert, and to work hard to accomplish the mission, not be the staff history expert. But again, whatever floats your boat. BTW, was this topic assigned? The only paper I wrote at FAOBC was an essay on why the guy next to me fell asleep the first day of Fire Support class.

[AmericanPride]

patmc,

The assignment is part of a (relatively) new aspect of MIOBC (afaik) called the Van Deman program. The culmination project is a short essay and 0-6 brief on a topic of our choice; perferrably something real-world and that as MI officers will have some kind of experience with. Other topics, for example: language training at MIOBC, the utility of BOLC2, and so on.

EDIT: My thesis-in-progress will have something to do with shifting the primary focus of the staff from supporting the commander to supporting the mission. Thought of it today, so still working on it.

[Ken White]

shifting the primary focus of the staff from supporting the commander to supporting the mission. Thought of it today, so still working on it.

Rather than an academic exercise with literature research to establish why Staffs are organized as they are -- or to explore better ways of organizing them since neither of those things is likely to provide any change, I have a suggestion.

Why not do some interviews with the MIOAC students and see if you can determine why MSG/1LT/CPT/MAJ Heebly reports to the Staff and for 89 days, rigorously and vigorously fights for the units and to downplay the power and intrusions of the Staff on said units -- and thus adverse Mission impacts.

Then, on the 90th day, MSG/1LT/CPT/MAJ Heebly becomes the quintessential Staff warrior and concerns for the unit and to an extent, the mission, are ignored.

Obviously, I'm overstating the case and equally obviously, we're talking about people so there are many variations on the theme. However, I think if you talk to some folks who've been there, they'll acknowledge that most people come to a Staff intending to do their best for the mission and units -- but that many succumb to what I call Staffitis and lose that focus. Some escape it and never do that -- but most do to one degree or another and in my observation, most who do that do so at about three months on the (or that particular) Staff...

{{Added: An interesting aspect is that rarely, some staffs do not have that problem; generally due to proper staff focus at the behest of a good commander. It has been my observation that the Staffitis phenomenon does occur most of the time on most Staffs even as various commanders and staff types, officer and enlisted, rotate through.}}

That has an adverse mission impact of some magnitude. It also may be amenable to change as most people do not necessarily want to become a part of the problem...

[patmc]

My thesis-in-progress will have something to do with shifting the primary focus of the staff from supporting the commander to supporting the mission. Thought of it today, so still working on it.

That sounds better than the strengths and weaknesses of the staff system, which would probably be quite an exciting doctoral work (no offense intended if anyone on this site has produced such a document). They're trying to bring back a mentorship program here between LTs and CPTs, and we were just linked up with the most recent OBC class, but If I or my classmates can help out, let me know. We're pretty friendly, and only a couple branch detail guys bite. Good luck.

[wm]

I recommend you spend your time here learning MI and about your role as a LT. Commanders and the staff will expect you to be the intelligence expert, and to work hard to accomplish the mission, not be the staff history expert.

Hear, Hear! This is a chance to do research on something something you really like and want to learn more about.

Once you get to be a coveted staff puke (the fate of most intel folks), you will get to pound your nuts into a pulp often enough doing meaningless research that does not mean squat to most of the operational force but is a pet rock for some senior officer.

[BayonetBrant]

American Pride,
I am at the CCC, currently learning MDMP. If you want to see the Army staff process, come upstairs and watch a squad of Captains learning FM 5-0. It is all smiles.

{shameless plug alert}

If you'd be interested in a workbook to help streamline the MDMP, check out:

Amazon.com: Battle Staff MDMP & Operations Order Planning Handbook


The author is a genius! {/shameless plug}

[AmericanPride]

wm,

Believe it or not, I'm very interested in the staff system and staff work. My particular interest is in campaign planning. Of course, I haven't actually done it yet so I'm still an idealist. My dad always told me the Army took the fun out of flying -- I can only imagine the horrors of Army staff work. I'll probably focus on the system of the Prussian Kingdom and the German Empire where staff work seemed to be held in extremely high regard, and some chiefs of staff having more prominence than the commander they were meant to support. Is it because of command culture, American culture in general, the structure/assumed purpose/resources of Army staff that results in a completely reverse staff experience for American officers? Or something else entirely?

Other subjects related to my grade/MOS, such as targetting, culture in COIN, and so on seem either saturated with views already, near full development, or don't pass the 'so what' test IMO.