Force XXI
MI Officer Professional Development
by Major Timothy P. Kiely and Captain Duane A.
Dannewitz
Military Intelligence (MI) is in the midst of a technological
and organizational revolution that will lead the Army into Force
XXI. However, as intelligence systems progress and existing
organizations evolve, we must ask if the MI officer is in a
professional development cycle that is standing still. If this is
true, will MI be able to send highly skilled officers to support
commands from maneuver battalions all the way up through national
agency levels? Will these officers be intelligence experts or
jacks of all intelligence trades"? The MI revolution must balance
changes in traditional professional development models with the
seemingly boundless potential of MI's new technology. Just as the
organizations of today must change to adapt to new systems, we must
reevaluate and modify MI officer professional development to meet
the intelligence needs of the 21st century warfighters.
MI Revolution
As we enter the information age, the MI Corps and the way that
it does business will change. The Corps, which is already more
technically advanced than most Army branches, is widening the
automation gap on the battlefield as it continues to field new
intelligence systems. The Corps is meeting, and in some cases
exceeding, its own expectations in demonstrating the incredible
power and potential these systems have. Many senior Army combat
arms officers support the use of new MI systems immediately in the
force. They expect to be the recipients of the timely, high-quality
intelligence products that these systems have the potential to
produce.
The Army is currently fielding systems such as the All-Source
Analysis System (ASAS), Commander's Tactical Terminal (CTT), Joint
Deployable Intelligence Support System (JDISS), and TROJAN Special
Purpose Integrated Remote Intelligence Terminal (SPIRIT). These
systems provide multiple windows into Army, joint, and national
databases, and an improved means through which to pass vital
information. The Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System
(Joint STARS), unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), and an improved
family of intelligence and electronic warfare common sensors can
more clearly depict the battlefield situation than ever before.
New systems require new organizations, doctrine, and training
methodologies. The MI Corps is keeping pace with the fielding of
the new technologies and systems. We are accomplishing this by
effecting changes in force structure and developing new
organizations (direct and general support companies in the MI
battalion, the analysis control element, and the Regional Signals
Intelligence (SIGINT) Operations Centers). Revision of the
34-series field manual and better ways to train the force while
staying cost-effective are some of the challenges the MI Corps has
been working to meet.
Professional Develop- ment The Weak Link
To complement all of these terrific changes to the MI Corps, we
must also change the way we approach the professional development
of our officers. MI officers must know and do so many things, we
run the risk of becoming Jacks of all MI skills, and masters of
none. An MI officer whose career is a variety or smorgasbord of
assignments, may perform well in the right jobs and get promoted.
However, that same officer runs the risk of developing into a
"generalist" that cannot be the subject matter expert at any level
because concentrated experience is not available from which to
draw. While this was not necessarily true in the past, the
ever-increasing technical complexity of our branch will ensure this
in the future.
This risk becomes more evident as the Army moves toward the
technical arena proposed for Force XXI. MI officers serve in
perhaps the most diverse branch in the Army, with six areas of
concentration, and have the overarching responsibility to be an
expert all-source intelligence officer. MI officers serve at
echelons above corps (EAC) and echelons corps and below (ECB) in
pure Army and joint assignments. In Force XXI, technical
competence coupled with the ability to conceptualize and build
intelligence support architectures will be more important than
ever.
Today, few MI officers have identical career patterns. In many
cases, this is unavoidable, but it creates a weak link in guiding
MI officers toward mastery of all-source and specialized
intelligence skills that serve to make them more effective. The
variety of locations, commands, and echelons where MI officers are
key staff members is increasing, even in a time of cutbacks and
closures. If MI is to adequately serve and support across the vast
spectrum of assignments, the Corps must closely manage officers'
careers and their professional development in order to assure their
success.
A Short-Term Solution
Department of the Army (DA) Pamphlet 600-3, Commissioned
Officer Development and Career Management, contains a comprehensive
guide to MI branch qualifications for MI officers. (For more detail
on this guidance, see the "Proponent Notes" in the January-March
1996 issue of the Military Intelligence Professional Bulletin.)
For junior officers, the procedure is straightforward.
Following these criteria rounds out their careers so they are ready
to serve in nominative assignments, pursue special schooling, or
serve in their functional areas. Officers who meet the criteria and
demonstrate solid performance will have an excellent chance of
selection for promotion through company grades and to major.
Selection boards often perceive officers who do not pursue the
assignments necessary to meet these criteria (even with outstanding
performance files) as being unqualified or less qualified for
promotions.
Establishing the branch qualification for field-grade level
officers is much more difficult. Currently, Joint, Department of
Defense (DOD), and table of distribution and allowances (TDA)
assignments take up more than two-thirds of all of the assignments
requirements for MI majors. Joint assignments are 36 months long.
This makes it difficult for MI majors to complete positions that
will make them more competitive for promotion, command and
schooling, S3, deputy G2 or G2.
The MI proponent has proposed an initiative that would include
MI in the joint critical operational specialties. This inclusion
would make most joint and DOD MI positions 24-month tours, allowing
majors to have at least 12 months in troop assignments prior to or
after serving in a joint or DOD billet. Overall, this change will
get MI majors back to troop units and allow better MI support to
corps-, division-, and brigade-level units while allowing MI majors
to serve in key professional development positions.
21st Century Solutions
The MI Corps realized the necessity for change at the end of the
Cold War and moved quickly to adjust its mission focus to fit
what has become the hallmark concept called Force XXI. This
process has caused the MI Corps to revalidate and restructure
officer positions in both table of organization and equipment (TOE)
and TDA units. If the MI Corps will continue serving ECB and EAC
echelons, from maneuver battalion S2 positions through the National
Security Agency Director, then MI must enhance our professional
development opportunities and make career management more
restrictive.
Currently, the Army assigns the majority of new MI Officer
Basic and Advanced Course graduates to troop units.
As most MI officers approach the seven- to eight-year mark in their
careers, they have spent three to six years in troop assignments
developing a sound Army base. Most have already commanded and are
considered MI branch qualified. At this point of MI officers'
careers, they must choose from several career paths. MI has six
areas of concentration serving at various echelons. We propose
three "career tracks" to allow officers to specialize in one area,
while remaining familiar with all aspects of the inteligence
battlefield operating system (IBOS).
Tactical MI Career Track. Most officers, in conjunction with
Army or personal choice, will remain in main stream assignments.
The Army will offer some functional area (FA) designations and they
will then serve in one or more assignments in their FAs. The
majority of MI officers will work in ECB units, Training and
Doctrine Command (TRADOC) assignments, and joint and DOD
assignments, on the DA staff, and in other nominative assignments.
This group forms the pool of future division, corps and Army G2s,
and ECB MI battalion and brigade commanders.
Strategic MI Career Track. During the same period of their
careers, other officers can make choices to attend specialty
schooling that will train them to serve predominately at EAC. Some
officers in this track will earn assignment to the Post Graduate
Intelligence Program (PGIP), the National Systems Development
Program (NSDP), and the Junior Officer Career Cryptologic Program
(JOCCP). These officers will serve in utilization assignments and
at EAC, TRADOC, and in joint, DOD and Army staff positions. This
group will produce our future leadership for Intelligence and
Security Command (INSCOM) battalion and brigade commanders,
Regional SIGINT Operations Center (RSOC) commanders, TRADOC system
managers, and senior EAC intelligence staff officers. Because of
their specialty training, these officers will not serve in
functional areas or nominative assignments, and most likely will
not return to ECB units.
Technical MI Career Track. Finally, some MI officers will
compete for selection to attend advanced civilian schooling (ACS).
These officers will acquire their ACS degree through a variety of
means, either at accepted public institutions or at such military
colleges as the Naval Post Graduate School. Officers in the ACS
program will receive primarily hard science degrees to fill MI
requirements at EAC, joint and DOD levels, the DA staff, and
TRADOC. This group would produce MI EAC battalion and brigade
commanders, TRADOC systems managers, combat developers, EAC
intelligence staff officers, instructors at the U.S. Military
Academy, and the scientists who will develop and field new MI
systems leading us into the information age. Because of their
specialization, these officers will not return to ECB units. MI
must continue to stress the need to send its officers for advanced
technical degrees that will continue to benefit the Corps long
after their initial utilization tours.
The MI Corps must get the most bang for the buck out of our
specialty trained officers (strategic and technical tracks) through
repetitive assignments in their specialty areas. We groom the
majority of this group of officers to operate predominately in the
EAC, joint, and DOD arena. Our goal is to develop officers who can
better compete for these assignments with sister-Service
intelligence officers (who have no requirement to serve in ECB-type
units), and thereby become more experienced and adept at EAC
operations. At the same time, it is important for us to develop a
cadre of officers focused on ECB that will support the combat arms
commander.
The Future for the MI Corps
Today's MI Corps is serving effectively at all echelons.
Increasing joint, DOD, and nominative requirements; poor
field-grade selection rates; voluntary exit programs; early
retirement programs; and increased new-system fielding all continue
to stress the system. MI will continue to fill all of our joint,
DOD, and nominative positions and we continue to send fully
qualified officers to ACS and specialty programs such as PGIP and
JOCCP. However, the stress on the system is beginning to show. The
increased operations tempo and need to do more with less is
taking its toll. The MI Corps must refocus the current officer
career management and professional development system to get the
best return on our training investment.
Even with minor changes to the system, the MI Corps still needs
to take a hard look at its requirements. In these days of drawing
down the Army, it is difficult for many senior officers in other
branches to understand how the ninth largest Army competitive
category branch can be the second largest officer branch (behind
infantry). This perception is intensified when fewer than 50
percent of the manuever brigade S2s are majors, and captains fill
many of the major grade-level positions on division and corps
staffs.
Conclusion
The Army drawdown originally scheduled to end in 1995 has been
officially extended to 1997. The current target of ten divisions
and four corps may become even smaller if the Army incrementally
extends the drawdown to 1999 or beyond. In Force XXI, the force
model may change even more with the development of the Mobile
Strike Force. MI must evaluate all future change possibilities and
be ready to refine our requirements to match the evolving Army.
Until then, the professional development life-cycle model MI
currently uses will remain in effect.
The future is uncertain but some type of change is inevitable
to both the Army and MI. Our branch needs an aggressive, logical,
proactive approach to the realignment of officer professional
development. MI is staking much of its reputation on Force XXI and
the supporting Intel XXI. If MI officers are not absolute masters
of the intelligence battlefield operating system at their level of
assignment, they cannot make significant and unique contributions
to their units. Focusing the career paths and choices that MI
officers make will be more important than ever. The MI proponent is
researching and analyzing all aspects of a successful MI officer's
career so that officers can apply these principles to their own
paths in the MI Corps.
Many combat arms officers want new MI systems such as the UAV
included in their TOEs so that they can direct the system to
conduct sensor to shooter operations. In an ever-shrinking Army,
branches attempting to save billets will look for bill payers
from other branches. Because the new MI systems are very good, many
have begun to think that perhaps the systems doing the work and
satisfying intelligence requirements do not require MI officers. We
in the MI Corps know that nothing could be further from the truth.
However, if we send Jacks of all trades to support commanders
instead of intelligence experts who make unique contributions to
their organizations, we run the risk of making MI officers
expendable at various levels of command. We must develop competent,
focused MI officers who, in Force XXI, will take the MI mission to
new levels of excellence and will sustain the vital contributions
MI already makes to the force.
Major "Tim" Kiely is currently attending the U.S. Army
Command and General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. He
holds a bachelor of arts degree in History from The Citadel in
South Carolina and a master of arts degree in Public Administration
from Troy State University.
Captain "Dewey" Dannewitz is currently in Headquarters
Company, 306th MI Battalion, Fort Huachuca, Arizona. He has served
in a variety of command and staff positions in MI, PATRIOT, and
signal units. Captain Dannewitz has a bachelor of science degree in
Biological Sciences from Mankato State University. Readers can
reach him at (520) 533-1180, DSN 821-1180, or via E-mail
dannewit@pentagon-hqdadss.army.mil.