Each year, cadets and candidates decide which branch they will serve in for the next four to twenty-plus years. The Army floods them with data, information, and knowledge through branch orientations, first-hand accounts, and observations. Some make their decisions easily, guided by personal career goals, family traditions, or branch-specific interests. Others feel that they are making a momentous decision without complete understanding of the options before them.
Army Doctrine Publication (ADP) 6-0 Mission Command, chapter 2 briefly describes the Army’s approach to decision making. “Decision making requires knowing if, when, and what to decide as well as understanding the consequences of that decision.” Understanding, critical to the decision-making process, is also described as the highest echelon of meaning in the knowledge/information management hierarchy (see figure 2.1, ADP 6-0). Achieving understanding requires processing data, analyzing information, and applying judgement to knowledge. Ideally, understanding will, “enable decision making, and drive action.”
While Talent Assessment Battery (TAB) feedback clarifies the best branch fit, perfect understanding of any complex decision exists only theoretically. Answering a few questions may help cadets and officer candidates narrow their choices and feel more comfortable with their decisions. Consider these questions and discuss them with your cadre, as well as your loved ones. The following questions may help form a more coherent idea of your ideal branch.
What branch will allow me to leverage my interests or knowledge?
The question probably seems obvious and simplistic, but this is where many cadets and candidates begin when weighing branching options. Unless you already possess a well-developed love of branch-specific operations, you are likely unaware of what knowledge you lack. Before homing in on skill sets specific to branches, consider the general roles that interest you.
Simply narrowing your choice down to a specific Warfighting Function may be a useful exercise. ADP 3-0 Operations, Chapter 5 describes each of the six Warfighting Functions and how they fit into the Combined Arms framework. While the Warfighting Functions may seem like even more nebulous concepts than the branches that they encompass, their roles within the Combined Arms concept collectively comprise the elements of combat power (see figure 5.1, ADP 3-0).
Warfighting Functions
Movement and maneuver branch officers (Armor, Aviation, Infantry) tend to drive operations focused on tactical objectives. They lead tactical formations and integrate effects and enablers from other Warfighting Functions to accomplish their missions. Personal attributes most essential to movement and maneuver officers include decisiveness, concise communication, and situational awareness.
Fires branch officers (Air Defense Artillery, Field Artillery) lead firing formations and advise maneuver commanders on the employment of fires. They are experts in planning, directing, and employing fires. As staff, they play a critical role in developing the concept of operations for the combined arms team. Fires officers are experts at assessing the tactical environment to allocate the strength of their force-multiplying resources.
Command and control branch officers (Cyber, Signal) enable commanders by integrating all the elements of combat power at their disposal. They lead formations in establishing and maintaining systems and networks to facilitate command and control throughout the organization. These leaders tend to lead smaller formations and achieve a high level of technical expertise. Leading in the rapidly-expanding “4th domain of combat,” these officers display superior attention to detail and troubleshooting ability.
Sustainment branch officers (Adjutant General, Finance, Ordnance, Medical Service, Quartermaster, Transportation) lead formations to, “provide support and services”, to enable operations. These officers are often responsible for managing considerable resources and developing sustainment plans for the combined arms team. The services and support provided by sustainment formations enable prolonged and continuous operations. These officers are skilled multi-taskers, capable of managing multiple priorities simultaneously to meet disseminated mission requirements.
Intelligence officers (Military Intelligence) lead formations that, “facilitate understanding the enemy, terrain, weather, civil considerations, and other aspects of the operational environment.” In addition to leading MI organizations, they often manage considerable material resources. MI officers are experts on effects of enemy, terrain, weather, etc. on the mission, and are critical advisors to commanders. They enable commanders to refine courses of action by narrating enemy actions and counteractions, a process known as “wargaming”. They are often self-motivated, perceptive individuals who are able to anticipate relevant information required by their commanders through detailed research and independent study.
Protection branch officers (Chemical, Engineer, Military Police) lead formations and manage resources to preserve the force and support maneuver formations. These officers lead platoon and larger formations and advise commanders on the employment of their capabilities. They often train and operate closely with the maneuver formations they support. Protection officers are the “jack of all trades” and thrive in environments with constantly shifting mission priorities requiring mental agility and initiative.
Am I better equipped to lead large, hierarchical groups, or smaller teams?
Sizes of platoons can vary widely depending on the type of organization and branch. Furthermore, lieutenants in some branches may not lead a platoon at all, instead overseeing a smaller staff section responsible for a specific function within the organization. Almost all combat arms officers will lead platoons, while officers in some combat support and combat service support branches may lead staff sections. Though platoon leader opportunities exist in branches such as adjutant general and military intelligence, many of these officers will lead a staff section or a functional cell within the section.
Do I prefer to lead and manage a team, or focus on technical aspects of my job?
While almost all officers manage risk and resources, and lead teams, officers in some branches play a more hands-on role in the technical duties of their teams. Aviation, cyber, and signal officers (to name a few) typically take a more hands-on role. Officers in branches like Field Artillery or Chemical, in addition to leading platoons, are responsible for advising maneuver commanders on the application of their technical capabilities.
What sort of experience do I want to gain from my Army experience that I can apply in my future civilian endeavors (whether in four or thirty years)?
It’s difficult to beat the leadership and management experience of leading maneuver formations and driving operations. Maneuver officers lead their elements to solve complex problems that involve physical and mental challenges. Other branches, such as Signal and Engineer, encourage their leaders to earn certifications. Certifications add problem-solving tools to officer’s kit-bags and diminish the civil-military interoperability gap. Logistics branches (Ordnance, Quartermaster, and Transportation) offer “training with industry” opportunities. These opportunities allow officers to work alongside civilian counterparts in well-respected companies while continuing to serve in uniform. In every branch, opportunities for personal and professional development, to include certifications and advanced degrees, are available. Regardless of which branch, the onus is on you to pursue opportunities and develop as a professional.
What does my gut tell me?
Don’t get wrapped up in the myth that unless you’re the “tip of the spear,” your service is insignificant. While movement and maneuver officers close with and destroy the enemy, all officers, regardless of warfighting function play equally essential roles in setting conditions for the fight. Each branch provides leadership opportunities as diverse and challenging as they are rewarding, and each needs competent, confident leaders within their formations. You will be most effective serving in the role that is right for you. When personally fulfilled by your duties, you are a better leader and a greater asset to the Army.
The Only Job that Matters
The only duty assignment, unit, or branch that matters is the one you’re in. While some anxiety over making your branching decisions is understandable, it’s important to keep it in perspective. Most importantly, you will serve in accordance with the needs of the Army. Selfless Service requires performing to your utmost where, when, and however you’re needed, not just in the job or assignment you think you want. At some point you will serve in a unit, position, or duty station that you’re not thrilled about. The soldiers in that formation deserve outstanding leadership, and therefore, your utmost effort.
Most leaders who have been around for a minute will tell you that what is truly important is the opportunity to lead and serve. While they love their branch, the majority feel that they would serve happily in whatever capacity the Army decided. Officers who are successful in their branch would likely be successful in just about any branch. The same Leader Attributes and Competencies that are used to evaluate cadets are used to evaluate Officers and NCOs. The Army Leadership Requirements Model applies to all leaders, regardless of branch. An officer with character, commitment to their mission and soldiers, and the innate drive to develop themselves will be successful whether as an infantryman or logistician.
More Cadet Resources @ The Azimuth Check
Complete archive of The Company Leader Posts