Staff products feed, drive, run, and track battlefield operations. Those products have a direct impact on soldiers (see figure 1). Effective staff products correlate with conducting command and control, which in-turn produces better situational awareness at echelon. If the outputs of the staff processes hold that much impact, who certifies staffs to ensure they are ready to perform? Units need an outlined process for staff certification. Staff certification increases staff confidence, enables better staff synchronization, expedites the operations process, reduces friction, and provides a venue to solidify processes and procedures unique for staff atmospherics.
Most battalion and brigade-level staffs would benefit from specified time to hone their abilities before arriving at a combat training center (CTC). They succeed in planning for the movement of the unit to the CTC, but fall short when preparing to support tactical operations. This becomes apparent during the early force-on-force periods. A standard certification process would help alleviate this condition. It would grow the confidence of the staff to provide necessary products for mission success. Staff sections need “reps and sets” to become confident which reduces battlefield hesitation.
Establishing the Need
Figure 1: ATZK-IM Poster 350-1-20, AUG 98
Some staffs will not execute cross-section events until a CTC rotation. This puts units behind the proverbial power curve as the majority of tasks during RSOI and early force-on-force drain staff bandwidths. A detailed certification process would require staff sections to become more interdependent and understand each other to better establish synchronization. This synchronization would prove extremely useful throughout the demanding CTC rotation.
The pace of projected combat operations requires rapid movement through the operations process to gain the advantage and reaction time. Staffs that are slow to help commanders visualize will put an added burden on combat units. Structured and demanding certification processes will help staffs become more comfortable with the operations process. They will find methods to expedite and deliver timely products to commanders. This will allow units to occupy positions of relative advantage.
Friction within staff sections decreases operational tempo. This friction arises for several reasons. Unfamiliarity with the MDMP, limited time spent on establishing and thinking through mission command functions, and a lack of established roles and responsibilities are leading causes. Moving through an organized staff certification will reduce friction which will thereby help increase tempo. Through intentional practice, units will identify those points of friction and can develop a mitigation plan.
A structured certification will help units solidify products and processes. This might be the most useful justification for the certification. Units arrive to train with a planning SOP, but seldom open it and use it because it was never validated prior to arrival. The certification is the venue to design, build, update/change, and finalize products and processes. This will help the staff prepare for operations in a complex training environment.
The Certification
Units should establish standards and requirements to certify their staff before arriving at a CTC. Units can execute this certification process in three phases; future operations (MDMP), transition between future operations and current operations, and current operations (TOC/TAC/Mission Command Node functions and RDMP). Each phase starts with inputs, progresses through processes, and ends with a required output. Completion of a phase marks a new certification level.
The updated TC 3-20.0 (Integrated Weapons Training Strategy; IWTS) includes an entire chapter on maneuver battalion and squadron training.[1] This provides an effective glide-path that moves a battalion-level unit through the training table strategy that culminates with a live-fire proficiency gate.[2] A specified staff certification process could augment the overall battalion training gate strategy as included in that training circular.
Phase I–Future Operations
The future phase would include a higher-level order and then subsequent MDMP steps. Similar to crew gunnery, an adjacent unit’s staff could “evaluate” the staff. At a minimum the battalion commander and command sergeant major should do the evaluation to ensure products and processes meet the commander’s expectation. In addition to those individuals, subordinate commanders (i.e., company commanders and first sergeants) should attend as well to provide input to the evaluation step.
Units will focus on developing running estimates, decision support matrices, fighting products, and an operations order the commander’s desired medium (e.g., JCR message, CPOF, Word Document, PowerPoint, or some other format), this process could take place during a field training exercise or within an installation’s Mission Command Training Center. A unit could refer to the combined arms battalion (ABCT) Standard METL Handbook to review performance steps.[3]
Phase II–Transition
This phase is critical. Staffs struggle with how to move the order from the planning phase to the execution phase. During this phase, units will focus on the operations order and fighting products. Staffs will move through this step after writing a script for a combined arms rehearsal (CAR) and then executing the rehearsal. Units will also create scripts for and execute a sustainment rehearsal and fires rehearsal. Within a BCT, the fire support coordinator (FSCOORD) and the sustainment coordinator (SUSCOORD) can serve as the external evaluator at these events. Now the staff is ready to move into the CUOPs phase.
Phase III–Current Operations (CUOPs)
The CUOPs phase will require staffs to establish mission command nodes and identify roles and responsibilities for each node. These nodes include the tactical operations center (TOC), tactical command post (TAC), and the mobile command group (MCG). Staff leaders need to solidify these echelons, and establish procedures and set-up functions. This may seem overly simplistic, but it is critical as unit staffs prepare for the fight.
The CUOPs phase ends once the commander approves the mission command node lay-out and the reports the staffs must provide.
Another step in this phase is the physical establishment of command and control systems to run the operation (e.g., FM/HF/BFT/Upper TI). This can also serve as a Mission Command validation exercise for the battalion. One of the most useful outputs of this phase is a refined set of SOPs for the unit and validation of published PACE plans.
Testing the Certification
Units can use a close combat tactical trainer (CCTT) or other simulated environment to test the feasibility of the unit staff certification.[4] The most important output here is the After-Action Review comments from an outside unit. Staff leaders should record the feedback and then re-train/ focus on the weakest areas. This should become an annual requirement, rather than a one-and-done to solely focus on a CTC Rotation.
Establishment of a staff certification requirement will also force units to resource training and focus time. That would be a tremendous gain for staff sections. Units learn quickly at the CTCs that staff processes and functions will facilitate effective command and control. Those units that spent time focusing on training their staffs experience positive impacts during a rotation.
–
Unit level staffs across echelon are full of soldiers that are determined to do the right thing. They want to work hard and succeed. However, without requisite training and communicated expectations, they struggle and don’t feel as though they have contributed. A clear certification process will mitigate that by increasing the level of confidence for each staff member. Through this deliberate process, a staff officer will discover the planning steps and products required by his or her commander. It will reduce confusion and replace that clear content by way on understood format. That’s powerful. The staff will better understand their commander’s tendencies, which will lead to a better end product.
Staff certification builds confidence just like gunnery builds crew confidence. The staff will receive target feedback on their performance. Once they know where they are, they can shift fire to achieve effects (i.e., iterate and re-train). An effective staff contributes to unit lethality when they rapidly help commanders to visualize a situation and synchronize assets to deliver effects.
Lt. Col. Ethan Olberding (Lizard 05) is the Executive Officer of Operations Group at the National Training Center, Ft. Irwin. Commissioned as an armor officer, he has served in armor and infantry brigade combat teams, with operational experience in both Iraq and Afghanistan.
[1] Department of the Army. Integrated Weapons Training Strategy (IWTS) (TC 3-20.0), 2019: Pg. 12-1.
[2] Department of the Army. Integrated Weapons Training Strategy (IWTS) (TC 3-20.0), 2019: Pg. 12-2.
[3] Department of the Army. Combined Arms Battalion (ABCT) Standard METL Handbook, 2018: Pg. 101.
[4] Department of the Army. Integrated Weapons Training Strategy (IWTS) (TC 3-20.0), 2019: Pg. 12-5.
Complete archive of The Company Leader Posts