Rob, good post once again, and good comments by all.

Niel- enjoyed the book review. Thanks for taking the time to write it.

Through Rob's last three posts, he's started a foundation for GPF to organize, plan, and train for SFA.

In regards to selection criteria, I'd propose the following to add (it kind of dovetails the discussion in the previous threads and Niel's book review).

When selecting/organizing your team for SFA, a commander must consider the following:

1. Individual Talent
2. People skills
3. Ability to solve or work in complex/ill-defined environments

Initially, I suggested that one of the main components should be the ability to develop, build and foster relationships. Rob suggested this action as a means to leverage existing FSFs to accomplish the mission. I agree, but I believe that is the overall objective.

To clarify, one can use the terms people skills, relationship building, team-building, etc...whatever best communicates the concept. As an advisor or GPF unit conducting SFA, one should strive to develop a bond/friendship with counter-parts.

Several ways to accomplish this include:

1. Eating meals together
2. Fighting together
3. Training together
4. Living together and sharing hardships

A commander must be selective when choosing individuals that have the ability to work with indigenious forces. Some soldiers are simply not people-persons and have a hard time adjusting outside of our normal military command structure. IMO, Those individuals do not need to be working directly with FSF. As a commander, I would allow those soldiers to work unilateral reconnaissance or direct action missions.

Given the relatively small pool a company/battalion level commander has to select his advisor teams from, I would imagine that teams will be generated off merit and not rank. This shift in thinking will be extremely difficult for many GPF forces, but I think it is a necessary one.

Standing by for feedback. Hope this is a bit helpful.

v/r

Mike