U.S. Marine Corps photo by Lance Cpl. Tanner D. Lambert. Oct. 25, 2019
The title gives the reader two words: (1) Mission and (2) Command. For the purpose of this discussion, “Mission” will be referenced as a noun. It is an assumption of the author’s that missions will continually evolve but military forces remain ready to adapt to achieve a successful end state.
“Command” on the other hand will be referenced as a noun and a verb. “Command” is a position found throughout varying levels of the military. “Command” is also a verb. For example, “A Lieutenant Colonel commands a battalion.”
A more apt and complete framing on trying to improve mission command came from a discussion with Major General Mick Ryan from the Australian Defence Force:
“The question might be “How do we develop leaders that are able to thrive in an environment that is nearly transparent at all levels of an institution (and externally), while ensuring they are sufficiently trusted and informed to assume risk and generate creative solutions?””
With the understanding that an assigned mission remains outside of an individual’s control, it leaves command as the variable to influence. In a world of growing requirements and technological advancements, it seems the military must continue its focus on individual development.
In order to be prepared to command, one must prepare for command. Intellectual acumen and a generalized education provides, what David Epstein in his book, “Range: Why Generalists Triumph in a Specialized World”, the key to operating in the current and future environments:
“And that is what a rapidly changing, wicked world demands—conceptual reasoning skills that can connect new ideas and work across contexts.”
This idea of working across contexts was captured perfectly in a military framework by General McChrystal’s book, “Team of Teams.” General McChrystal worked to break down barriers, increase transparency, and relegate decisions to the lowest possible level increasing tempo for every individual to achieve success for the team. How does the military teach this?
The current professional military education (PME) model is adequate at providing future commanders the basis for such ideas with company and field grade level formal schools. Using my own career as an example, there is room for improvement. Having completed command and staff at year ten of my career, my next formal PME opportunity presents itself after the twenty year mark. A decade without formal schooling leaves it largely to individual initiative and desire for continual self-improvement. There exists numerous military friendly graduate programs available to complete distance education. The opportunity to pick up a book or buy one electronically is literally at our finger-tips. Is this enough?
The Navy has recently established a Chief Learning Officer designing the force of the future with the ability to out-think the adversary. The Commandant of the Marine Corps has published guidance indicating a more strenuous education with focus on naval integration. The army on the other hand has established a test—enter the Battalion Commander Assessment Program (BCAP).
I am interested in the data and future results from BCAP to validate or disprove the program’s effectiveness. Other services may glean improvements to the command selection process by observing this program for the foreseeable future. My hope is BCAP will prove useful in improving Mission Command by selecting those best prepared to command and help shape not just the Army, but the DoD in future command screening.
The BCAP is an evaluation process whereas the Marine Corps process for command screening is based on a review of the officer’s official record by a non-statutory board. The Marine Corps fitness report, or performance evaluation, is largely dependent upon the reviewer writing the report similar to other services. In my opinion, the Marine Corps does very well with its current fitness report grading criteria when compared to other services, but the current Commandant intends to improve in this particular area.
The Army’s BCAP may have discovered how to provide a more holistic process to screen for command. BCAP is now a known event in the command screening process and with it comes the byproduct of requiring potential future commanders to prepare prior to the interview. Knowing you are going to interview with a board is much different than awaiting board results to be published via official message traffic. Training for a marathon leaves the runner with a few options, come prepared, not train and suffer through the 26.2 miles, or not run. The BCAP does the same.
To better facilitate preparation for such evaluations the Joint Force could benefit from consolidating annual and fiscal year training tailoring it to rank and experience giving back valuable time to the individual. A new private or lieutenant may be required to conduct ten hours of online training per year whereas a field grade officer or senior enlisted may only have an hour refresher providing time back to the individual to prepare for such requirements as the BCAP.
Having recently completed my field grade tour at the battalion level, I was surprised at the assumption that certain individuals either do not want, require, or receive mentoring. Although I required everyone in my department to receive mentoring, I intentionally spent more time trying to develop and retain the highest performers for the health and long-term effectiveness of the force. Too often I have seen high performers go without mentoring because many assume those individuals know what they’re doing or don’t require it. Mentoring is extremely important and once again captured by General McChrystal describing Lord Admiral Nelson’s clear intent and development of his subordinates at the Battle of Trafalgar:
“To any other Nation the loss of a Nelson would have been irreparable,” said French vice-admiral Villeneuve, after the battle, “but in the British Fleet off Cadiz, every Captain was a Nelson.”
For the military to improve mission command, it must continue to develop those competing for command. Consolidation of extraneous training not directly required to improve individual effectiveness must be consolidated or removed for the entire Department of Defense. Education and individual development must remain at the forefront. In a few years the DoD may see the Army leading the way in the command screening process evaluating the physical and mental vigor of service members best suited for command.
If the Army has established a process to evaluate future commanders this implies the Army is providing ample education on how to command. This is the area I believe the DoD can continue to improve as this is not an Army specific issue. No amount of doctrine can fix a system if the person reading it does not understand how to apply it through a broad and generalized education that goes far beyond the current required PME schools.
Subscribe to The Field Grade Leader!
Major Ryan Pallas is a Marine Officer and CH-53E pilot. He has completed tours at Miramar, CA, Yuma, AZ, and Marine Corps Base, Hawaii. He currently serves as the Operations Officer for HMH-463 at Marine Corps Base, Hawaii.