Military Officers and Creativity

Article infers a reference to the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). The assessment has its critics but I have found it has been a useful tool – I’m generally pretty accurate in identifying preference which helps improve communications.

Op-Ed. An Officer and a Creative Man, By MARK MOYAR, December 19, 2009, New York Times

Researchers have found that the leadership ranks of big organizations are dominated by either "sensing-judging" or "intuitive thinking" personality types. Those in the former category rely primarily on the five senses to tell them about the world; they prefer structure and standardization, doing things by the book and maintaining tight control.

.. . But this personality type functions less well in activities that change frequently or demand regular risk-taking, like technological development or counterinsurgency. Organizations that thrive under such conditions are most often led by people with intuitive-thinking personalities. These people are quick to identify the need for change and to solve problems by venturing outside the box.

Comments about the Article: Small Wars Journal.

Army: Training for Full Spectrum Operations

ARTICLE: Army’s New Manual: Peacekeeper Training, AP, December 17, 2008

The Army has released its first new training field manual in six years, highlighting the need for units to be ready to conduct stability operations after traditional combat has ended.

The manual, titled “Training for Full Spectrum Operations” and written at Fort Leavenworth, explains what soldiers can expect when in combat.

“While we will never be able to fully comprehend the thousands of variables in a complex system, we can train to recognize those which are found in most. So the first time our soldiers come across a certain type of situation is in training, not on the battlefield,”

Minerva: Pentagon and Social Scientists

Defense Department Planning To Expand Minerva Initiative, (Inside The Pentagon)…Jason Sherman

The Pentagon plans this year to expand a fledging program launched by Defense Secretary Robert Gates to foster cooperation between the military and social scientists in a bid to improve understanding of 21st-century security challenges and develop a cadre of experts to influence national security policy.

Gates, a former college president, launched the Minerva Initiative last year with the goal of invigorating the type of collaboration between the Pentagon and academic institutions that thrived during the Cold War.

Just as the National Defense Education Act of 1950 encouraged the study of subjects like Marxism, Leninism and communism, yielding insights into the Soviet Union, Gates has handpicked new areas for research that he hopes will produce long-term results. These include Chinese military and technology studies; research that illuminates the perspectives of terrorists; research into possible disciplines required to deal with current and future security challenges; and religious and ideological studies.

On Dec. 22, the Pentagon awarded contracts to seven researchers working with 16 academic institutions. The National Science Foundation, which last summer partnered with the Defense Department on the Minerva initiative, is expected to announce another round of awards this month.

Joint Strike Fighter

A Defensive Strike For Its Fighter Jet (Dallas Morning News)…Eric Torbenson, Jan 6, 2009.

Seven years ago, Lockheed Martin Corp. won a bitterly fought contract for what would end up being the world’s most expensive fighter jet program. Today, it finds itself in an odd position: having to defend the plane it won the right to build.

Published reports saying the F-35 – featuring the latest in avionics – fared poorly in a military exercise with Russian jets also stirred up military watchers.

Both criticisms were rebutted by Lockheed and generals who called the plane a racehorse. It carries much more fuel to expand its range and hides many of its weapons internally, both big advantages over current aircraft, they said. Its three variants will have many common parts, lowering maintenance expenses.

Lockheed’s F-22 Raptor fighter program has already been scaled back and faces more budget cuts in the next Congress, analysts say. A program initially devised to build 750 F-22s has been cut to 183 – and some in Congress want even fewer.

“Pakistan Top U.S. Challenge”

National Security Adviser Says Pakistan Is Top U.S. Challenge, (Wall Street Journal)…John D. McKinnon, Jan 7, 2009

The biggest foreign-policy challenge awaiting President-elect Barack Obama isn’t Iraq or Afghanistan but Pakistan, President George W. Bush’s national-security adviser said.

In an interview previewing a valedictory speech he plans to give on Wednesday, National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley said Pakistan’s increasingly turbulent border region poses threats not just to the U.S. mission in Afghanistan, but also to neighboring India, as evidenced by the recent Mumbai terrorist attacks, as well as to urban areas of Pakistan itself — and the world beyond.

Risk and Financial Collapse

On the issue of objective vs subjective information, you will always need the right balance of both. I addressed a similar topic on the subject of militar’s Effect Based Operational concept.

Did managers of risk outsmart themselves? Joe Nocera, New York Times magazine, Jan 4, 2009.

The story that I have to tell is marked all the way through by a persistent tension between those who assert that the best decisions are based on quantification and numbers, determined by the patterns of the past, and those who base their decisions on more subjective degrees of belief about the uncertain future. This is a controversy that has never been resolved.’

— FROM THE INTRODUCTION TO ‘‘AGAINST THE GODS: THE REMARKABLE STORY OF RISK,’’ BY PETER L. BERNSTEIN

Afghanistan: Supply Route

Khyber Action Near End, (Washington Post)…Unattributed, January 2, 2009, Pg. 13

Pakistan will reopen the main supply route for Western forces in Afghanistan in the next few days after security forces achieved most of their objectives in an offensive, a Pakistani official said Thursday.

Authorities suspended the shipment of supplies through the Khyber Pass to the Afghan border on Tuesday to clear the way for the military to launch an offensive aimed at ending surging attacks on the route.

“We have achieved more than 80 percent of objectives, and from tomorrow the curfew will be relaxed, while the main road will be opened in the next two to three days,” Tariq Hayat Khan, the top government administrator in Khyber, told reporters.

The U.S. military sends 75 percent of supplies for the Afghan war through or over Pakistan, including 40 percent of the fuel for its troops, the Pentagon says.

Insurgents in Khyber have been trying to choke off supplies for months and have destroyed hundreds of trucks and killed several drivers.

Khan said 15 people wanted by the government were captured or had surrendered, while 37 hideouts had been destroyed.

Military Funding

POST: Tough love for the Pentagon, by Thomas P.M. Barnett on December 22, 2008

OP-ED: How to Pay for a 21st-Century Military, New York Times, December 20, 2008

You want some tough love on the Pentagon budget to pay for the interventions (overwhelmingly SysAdmin in nature) we’re still waging and are likely to wage in the future, well . . . this is what the hit list looks like.

Simply brutal, but well chosen.

The much fabled train-wreck seems to have finally arrived.

(Thanks: pilgrimstevec)

Army: Future Combat Systems (FCS)-Funding

The Planned Change principle generally includes three courses of action: Maintain/sustain the current system/process, evolutionary/incremental improvement or revolutionary improvement through re-design. The higher degree of change, the higher the risk. Risk can be minimized through use of the concept of Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs). FCS incorporates all three approaches and a strategic assessment will help identify priorities for funding.

Why Funding Future Combat Systems Is A Must, (European Stars and Stripes)…Sen. John Cornyn, December 19, 2008, Pg. 19

The federal government has a solemn duty to provide our men and women in uniform with the best equipment available to ensure they can fight and win against any opponent on any battlefield on Earth. That is exactly the intent behind Future Combat Systems (FCS), the Army’s flagship modernization program, which represents a quantum leap in military technology. By making our ground forces lighter, faster and more lethal, and equipping them with weapon systems that are more survivable, more deployable, and more sustainable, FCS will change the way our Army does business.

In short, FCS is an interoperable family of cutting-edge ground vehicles, UAVs, ground robots, indirect fire weapons and sensors. Each component is interconnected through the FCS communications and data network, allowing for unparalleled information sharing. FCS will provide our soldiers the means to execute both counterinsurgency operations, now the most critical piece of the missions in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the conventional warfare for which Bradleys, Abrams tanks and other legacy systems were designed. Whether battling uniformed military forces or insurgents who conceal themselves within a civilian population, FCS will enable our soldiers to see the enemy first, understand the situation, then act decisively.

But that’s only part of the story. FCS, at its core, is about soldiers; it’s about empowering them to make decisions that are quicker, better-informed and more sound. With individual soldiers functioning as intelligence assets, FCS will allow 360-degree information flow — streaming up to unit commanders, down to individual soldiers, and out to adjacent units — enabling better integration of actions against a foe.

We will digitally link our soldiers at every level, thanks to the FCS network and the new Ground Soldier System, which is separate but fully complementary to FCS. Soldier-worn and integrated into the body armor, the lightweight system consists of a compact computer, GPS unit, helmet-mounted display and communications system. It will allow us to maximize soldiers’ situational awareness.

Unfortunately for soldiers, the FCS program has had an uphill climb since conception. With a large price tag, it has been repeatedly targeted for funding cuts in Congress. FCS is highly complex — with 14 different platforms, more than 300 different technologies, and more than 600 contracts in place — which has made it difficult to tell the story of its potential.

The name itself has contributed to broad misperception, arguably sounding more like something intended to fight space-age enemies on distant battlefields than what it actually is: a family of game-changing weapon systems ideally suited to fight enemies on the streets of Iraqi cities, the unforgiving terrain of Afghanistan, and conventional battlefields. As such, it is past time for the Army to change the name.

FCS nonbelievers, some of whom argue that FCS will be of limited value in modern-day counterinsurgency operations, should take note that FCS addresses more than 80 percent of all “operational needs statements” (requests for new equipment and situational awareness capabilities) generated in the past two years by our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Moreover, early versions of FCS equipment are helping soldiers take the fight to the enemy and save American lives today. Our Explosive Ordnance Disposal teams are using small FCS-derived robots called “Packbots” to clear improvised explosive devices from the roads our troops travel. Packbots are also being utilized to clear buildings, caves and bunkers. In addition, for the past year, U.S. troops in Iraq have been flying more than 20 FCS-derived, back-packable UAVs, called “Micro Air Vehicles,” to spot IEDs before they kill or injure anyone. Even the latest enhanced armor kits for HMMWVs are based on FCS technology.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates has said that our military should be “moving aggressively in wartime to provide resources needed now on the battlefield,” and the Army’s two-phased fielding strategy for FCS follows this guidance. Because infantry Brigade Combat Teams have been in the highest demand during post-9/11 combat operations, the Army will “spin out” essential FCS equipment to these units first.

New FCS equipment arrives on a regular basis at Fort Bliss, Texas, where the Army Evaluation Task Force is based. The AETF, whose ranks are filled by combat-seasoned soldiers, provides immediate feedback on the equipment before it is fielded to troops, representing a huge leap forward in the way the Army acquires weapon systems.

Our current inventory of Army weapon systems is aging rapidly and may not last as long as intended. That makes it even more crucial that the Army’s next weapon systems be fielded now, with the capability to defeat the threats of both today and tomorrow. With FCS, we have that technology in hand, and we have a golden opportunity.

John Cornyn, a Texas Republican, serves on the Senate Armed Services Committee, where he is the ranking Republican on the airland subcommittee, which is responsible

for oversight of Army weapons programs and funding levels.

Toyota: First Operating Loss Since 1941

Toyota projects first operating loss since 1941, By YURI KAGEYAMA, AP Business Writer, Dec 22, 2008.

Toyota forecast an operating loss of 150 billion yen ($1.66 billion) for the fiscal year ending March 2009. Toyota has never reported an operating loss since it began disclosing such figures in 1941. But it did have an operating loss in unofficial, internal calculations for the year ending March 1938 a year after the company was founded.

Operating income reflects a company’s core business performance and does not include income taxes and certain other expenses. Last fiscal year, Toyota had an operating profit of 2.27 trillion yen.