As one older and even more cynical, I gotta admit I'm impressed by what I've seen the Army trying to do in the last year or two. The important and needed hurdle of transformation to the BCT model while conducting operations hurt and delayed the effort you saw today -- but it's been building.

You may recall I said I'd have answers and wanted to know if the Army had the right questions. I didn't bring them to the board because every one of them got answered in the read aheads on this conference that I was able to see. Just for grins, here they are:

For TRADOC Sr Leaders Conf 18-20 Aug 09, SWJ Live Blogging.

Answers ((Key Point)) / questions are:

1. Part of the problem with risk avoidance is lack of trust. This is engendered by two factors; not being familiar with the people who work for you and a valid sensing that they aren't really thoroughly trained. ((The solution to these problems is lessened rotational frequency and better initial entry training for Officers and Enlisted Persons.)) / What can we do to lessen the problem of risk avoidance?

2. A performance factor and a risk avoidance factor is lack of timely attendance at advanced professional education. Many Lieutenants and Captains command at company/battery or troop level and / or serve on Staffs prior to attending the Career Course. Many NCOs will serve in leadership positions before they attend PME. The reality is that most people will almost certainly serve in a position one rank -- and probably two ranks -- higher than the the rank at which they were last trained or schooled before they again go to institutional training. This problem can be addressed by increasing the content and time of the Officer Basic Courses and some effort in that direction has been made. ((Each person should be trained in the schoolhouse for his or her next assignment entailing synchronization of PME and promotions.)) / Question: What is the one big fix to be made to improve PME?

3. While we train better now than we ever did, more effort is required. There has also been a flurry of new doctrinal material. Most is quite good but it does tend to be wordy and this can cause people to lose interest and not read the manuals to extract critical points. This is partly due to the lack of a grasp of the basics of our profession by new entrants, both Officer and Enlisted, the compensatory factor is to overdo the doctrinal material to fill that shortfall. This is a flawed approach. ((Improve initial training and the need for lengthy, overly verbose and over prescriptive material disappears.)) / Question: How can we improve doctrinal publications?

4. The use of tasks, Conditions and Standards as a training mechanism was adapted from industry, it was used by them to train new hired to do specific jobs. It is an excellent system for training new soldiers in a mobilization scenario. It is adequate for the assignment of soldiers to units in major conflicts and it should be retained for such use. However, it is not truly appropriate for a professional force which must be capable of full spectrum operation and in which conditions will vary widely. In the past, this flawed system was overcome by good and dedicated Officers and NonCommissioned Officers who did an excellent job of training their units in spite of a flawed system. ((The solution to the inadequacy of the current Task based training regimen is to accelerate adoption of Outcome Based Training.)) / Question: What is the single most important change to training that the Army can effect