Quote Originally Posted by Hacksaw View Post
I would offer that AWG as currently organized makes little sense...they were aligned they way they were in order to take them "out of the system"..."
Ture but adjustments will be made...
an organism/organization will fight against a foreign "element" inserted artificially... second, since they exist "outside the system" the solutions they develop are likewise outside the system; An ingenius box delivered to a deployed HQ in theater, with one time training, is a door stop within two rotations...
Your premise is of course totally correct but the latter part is not true in this case. They're successfully working on the fourth year of rotations and not as door stops. Most there are totally aware that if the Army functioned as it was supposed to, they would not be needed. They are also regrettably aware that they are needed. They also know that even if they went away today, company intel cells and a number of other things they introduced are in fact embedded in the organism...
I suppose Ad Hoc(ery) has its place, but it is terribly inefficient...
I disagree. Strongly. Not that ad-hocery is inefficient, it sometimes is (it is also sometimes wonderfully efficient) -- but with the implication that ad-hocery is bad. I suggest that a minimal reading of US military history shows a rich and effective tradition of ad hocery. Bureaucracy is not a 21st Century invention...
and I think the answer is that there are a lot of good reasons/advantages to a system that doesn't respond to every single bump in the night... maybe the institutional base shouldn't be easily moved to reflect the whims of a leader who is in place for 24 mths as a rule...
That's true but that also is not the total answer. Hidebounditis and turf protection also come to mind as equally salient reasons why the system cannot or will not tell the difference between a genuine need to adapt versus a bump in the night...
"(did so about 5 years ago, re-wrote the TR 10-5 series, and then ignored it)
Is that akin to this?
"maybe the institutional base shouldn't be easily moved to reflect the whims of a leader who is in place for 24 mths as a rule..."