Introduction
For the last decade and a half, the United States military has found themselves in a "wash, rinse, and repeat" cycle geared around training, deployments, and reset operations. The war brought a significant amount of support from all over to boost military power but now the operational environment is changing and with that comes a rebalance of readiness needs. Military forces should make operational readiness a top priority, but a decrease in the fiscal budget and manning constraints will impact success. The purpose of this paper will be to provide a board analysis on the status of the military's current operational readiness. Furthermore, the review will cover two critical issues related to budgeting and manning requirements as
…show more content…
Congressman Thornberry, Chairman for the House Armed Service Committee, commented that "a variety of factors including budget cuts, the failure to recognize and then address mounting readiness problems, as well as shrinking the size of the force while keeping a high tempo of operations" are damaging our current preparedness status (Gould, 2017, para. 4). The budget crisis is probably one of the most significant challenges currently harming the operational readiness of military forces worldwide. Those that served in the late 90's and early 2000's can remember a time when the budget was so low there was barely any equipment, supplies, or resources to train forces the proper way. According to Livingston (2017), the challenges currently faced between readiness and the current budget crisis could be traced back to the Budget Control Act of 2011 which had a significant impact on force restructuring. Furthermore, it was asserted after the 2013 budget sequestration, that the current budget would reduce critical infrastructure and services, training events, and have a crucial influence on the overall quality of life readiness (Index of U.S. Military Strength, …show more content…
During times of transition operational readiness will be impacted and now is no different as are current status is not adequate to face another war on the home front. Leaders at all levels of the government and military need to realize that operational readiness needs to be the number one priority to ensure that forces remain ready to face there next challenges in the world. Current readiness status is low; impacted by both budget cuts and the drawdown of both manning and combat action units. These constraints will have to be met by the military's future leadership where they will have to learn to be resourceful when developing training plans as well as management skills. The current state of the military readiness is starting to improve but will take these leaders to move it forward to the next
As the incoming brigade commander, LTC (P) Owens, I see the critical leadership problem facing the 4th Armored Brigade Combat Team (ABCT) is the inability or unwillingness of Colonel Cutler to lead and manage change effectively. In initial talks with Col Cutler and in reviewing the brigade’s historical unit status reports, the 4th ABCT performed as well as can be expected in Afghanistan, but as the onion was peeled back there are numerous organizational issues that were brought to the surface while I walked around and listened to the soldiers of the 4th ABCT, in addition to reviewing the Center for Army Lessons Learned (CALL) report. One of the most formidable tasks of a leader is to improve the organization while simultaneously accomplishing
While many of these changes include the advancements in technology and ingenuity, nothing can replace the rich history, proud culture, and bright future of the NCO Corps. Though several additional factors doubtlessly play roles in the strength and continuity of the corps, I do not believe any have contributed to the extent of the solid rank structure, efficient training network, and passionate NCO Creed. These elements have worked together in continuously strengthening and molding the NCO Corps, and they will remain building blocks that will project the Army into the
A military officer must manage pieces of one of the largest organizations in the United States government - an organization that accounts for the third largest piece of the American budget and is comprised of 1.3 million active sailors, soldiers, airmen, and marines, many of whom are tasked with being deployable to any location within 48 hours. This is only possible through concise, professional communication on the part of every service member, especially
LM06, Strategic Planning Student Guide. (2013). Maxwell-Gunter AFB. Thomas N. Barnes Center for Enlisted Education (AETC).
In today’s operational environments, the U.S. Army is facing a range of problems and mission sets that are arguably more complex than previously encountered. Forces face an array of demands that encompass geo-political, social, cultural, and military factors that interact in unpredictable ways. The inherent complexity of today’s operations has underscored the need for the Army to expand beyond its traditional approach to operational planning. In March 2010 in FM 5-0: The Operations
Sir, I am honored by the privilege to once again serve in 4th Armored Brigade Combat Team (ABCT). Over of the last 30 days, I had an opportunity to reconnect, and reflect on the current state of the Brigade. The 4th ABCT has a rich history of success and glory. It is my goal to put in place the systems and practices for this great organization to exceed all past and present accomplishments. As a result of my assessment, I identified three areas of focus that will improve our organization: a unit vision, a change in organizational culture and climate, and building organizational teams. I have no doubt that with the implementation of these three areas of focus, I will be the transformational leader that 4th ABCT needs as we prepare for the upcoming National Training Center (NTC) rotation and tackle the task of the Regionally Aligned Forces (RAF) mission.
We can identify three major cultural dimensions that help us to understand what leaders must focus on as they guide the transition of the Army. First, professional Identity, which is guided by Soldiers at all levels who are striving for excellence in their functional specialty, i.e., HR Sergeants. Soldiers who have goals and ideals of the Army to ethically put service and duty first. HR Sergeants are trained and well educated in their field. They are taught to put Soldiers first and have great customer support skills. Second, community, the sense in which Soldiers stop thinking about “I” and start thinking “we”. The bond among units who not only believe in cohesion with Soldiers, but their families too. The HR Sergeants are there to take care of Soldiers when financial issues arise with them or their families and don’t back down until the situation is solved. Last, hierarchy, which leads to order and control and provides Soldiers with moral reference and a sense of direction. The HR Sergeant has the mentality of mission first, knowing who to contact at the next level for assistance helps get the mission
Military spending should decrease because they are spending more money in defense then in us. “ Never underestimate the effects of cheap products and mediocre service on cost.” (Tierney 2) defense spending affects the country and the people. Spending less in product have more affect in products that cost more. You can spend in billion dollar rocket compare to a thousand dollar rocket and have the same impact and power. The result in high contractor turn over rates, which will drive poor performance and higher costs. Our government spends about 1 trillion of dollars per year in defense security programs. The U.S spends 54% of the money for military purposes. Overall its good to spend that much to keep us safe but you won’t be protecting nobody if we are all dead, for not supporting us. Whenever threats
As we transition from subjective training to objective, it is critical to understand the emphasis on training has not changed, just the language. Commander will continue to focus on battle focus training developed by long- range, short- range and near- term planning. The Sustainable Readiness Model (SRM) is the Army’s newest system for prioritizing resources for units on a 5-year cycle based on the level of readiness they must achieve. Each year of the cycle has established Personnel (P), Sustain (S) and Readiness (R) Aim Points on the Unit Status Report (USR). The SRM seeks to stabilize units in a “band of excellence,” even following their READY year, maintaining the highest readiness level instead of automatically downgrading their readiness to a C4 level regardless of whether they deployed. Guidelines in the Prepare Year (PY) found in the SRM will assist Commanders at every level on key training events they will need to focus on for that particular
This imposes problems on the military and even on the government. One article states that, “Reduced budgets and the threat of sequestration create a sense of uneasiness in the ranks, and those fears are fueled by politicians willing to shut down the federal government rather than compromise.” (Army Magazine) This is because with the increase of budget cuts they start to cause problems for the ones who are working and this creates lost jobs in the military. No one wants to lose their job not even the ones that have put forth a great amount of time and effort in the military. For the ones that have been in the military for a long period of time this can actually have negative effects on their life style and even cause problems when returning
Leaders today need to have an appreciation for the operation process, understand a situation, envision a desired future, and to lay out an approach that will achieve that future (Flynn & Schrankel, 2013). Plans need to be created that can be modified to changes in any factors considered. However, plans should not be dependent on specific information being precise or that require things to go exactly according to schedule. Instead, the staff NCO should be flexible where they can and always be prepared for the unexpected. Today’s military members are fighting an unconventional war in Iraq and Afghanistan. The enemy constantly changes their tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTP’s) to counter the United States technological advances, making planning very difficult for leaders. There are multiple tools at a staff NCO’s disposal to try to anticipate an outcome of a current operation, but also assist with the development of concepts in follow-on missions. The Military Decision Making Process (MDMP) is just one tool a staff NCO can utilize. In order to stay ahead of the enemy, create effective plans and orders, it is critical for a staff NCO to assist the commander, and understand that the MDMP and planning are essential in defeating the enemy and conserving the fighting force.
In a world where people rush to purchase lottery tickets in the hopes of hitting a jackpot worth a few million, these expenditures are incomprehensible and may seem excessive; however, not everyone feels this way. In an article found on the U.S. Department of Defense’s website, the “DoD has done its best to manage through this prolonged period of budget uncertainty, the secretary said, making painful choices and tradeoffs” and that in “today’s security environment we need to be dynamic and we need to be responsive. What we have now is a straitjacket” (Pellerin, 2015). At the end of the day, it is all about who is being asked whether the defense budget is excessive; for those that do not feel an imminent threat is looming, the budget would seem over-the-top, but for those that either feel that a threat is imminent, or those working in the defense sector, would most likely be in favor of sustaining the current budget or increasing it. Furthermore, another topic to look at is how the United States compares with other countries on defense spending and is the difference validated?
“Operational design is a journey of discovery, not a destination.” Operational design provides a framework, with the guidance of the Joint Force Commander (JFC), that staffs and planning groups can use to give political leaders, commanders, and warfighters a comprehensive understanding of the nature of the problems and objectives for which military forces will be committed, or are planned to be committed. Furthermore, operational design supports commanders and planners to make sense of complicated operational environments (often with ill-structured or wicked problems), helps to analyze wicked problem, and devise an operational approach to solve the problem in the context of the operational environment.
Armed with numerous studies, and intensive public hearings, Congress mandated far-reaching changes in DOD organization and responsibilities in the Goldwater-Nichols Department of Defense Reorganization Act of 1986. This landmark legislation significantly expanded the authority and responsibility of the chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff. Included in this expanded authority and responsibility was the requirement for the chairman to develop a doctrine for the joint employment of armed forces. As operations Urgent Fury, Just Cause, and Desert Storm have vividly demonstrated, the realities of armed conflict in today's world make the integration of individual service capabilities a matter of success or failure, life or death. Furthermore, the operation Desert One demonstrated the need for a strengthened Joint Warfare Doctrine and the consequent change in Joint Warfare Employment. It is plain to see the benefits of having the greatest navy integrated with the world's greatest army and air force. However, even in the wake of a relatively successful joint operation in the Middle East (Desert Storm), certain weaknesses are evident in the current joint employment tactics and/or capabilities. By analyzing past operations such as Urgent Fury and Desert Storm, we are able to see sufficient evidence that the Joint Warfare Concept can be disastrous in one instance and virtually flawless in another.
Since the attacks a number of civil defense programs have been initiated, which leads to more departments asking for an allowance within the national budget. This ultimately is leading to a larger and larger deficit that is quickly encompassing full percentage points of our GDP. There is a debate on how much defense spending is actually needed, because during the Clinton administration there were massive cuts to the defense budget, which lead to critics saying that our military force was in question. These same critics said that without the funds that had been cut-off by Clinton the military would spiral down to not being able to defend the homeland, let alone take on any offensive. The one argument I have is that President Bush was not in office long enough for his increased defense budget to take affect when he overthrew two regimes (Afghanistan & Iraq) with the same military force that was said to be completely ineffective because of lack of funds.