Tag Archives: Rand

The Corps Part V

LOL. This one is funny even if it is a tragedy. I can see it coming. Cpl  Finicnick reports to his company commander that his Lt is an asshole and uses drugs. It matters not that Cpl Finicknick was a Sgt six months ago. OMG This reminds me of the HQMC imposed HumRel classes in 1970  that required us to sit in groups of officers and enlisted and everyone was allowed to say whatever they wanted. LOL, That did not happen in our battalion thanks to Major John I. Hopkins (MajGen, USMC (Ret) Deceased). God Bless him.  But I heard absolute horror stories from my peers from other units.

The Marine Corps wants junior Marines to have a say in who their leaders are

“Beginning in 2022, we will institute 360-degree feedback for leaders, on a pilot basis” says Commandant Berger.

Junior Marines could help determine whether officers and senior enlisted leaders are selected for promotion as part of the Marine Corps’ efforts to revamp its evaluation process.

Marine Corps Commandant Gen. David Berger is calling for promotion boards to incorporate “360-degree feedback” into their decisions about which leaders will be selected to advance to the next rank.

Berger’s direction on using 360-degree feedback is part of his Talent Management plan, which was released on Nov. 3. The plan also requires the Marine Corps to retain more first-term Marines and creates the possibility that civilians with critical skills could bypass boot camp to join the service.   This will be Part VI, so stay tuned.

Currently, promotion boards largely base those decisions on Marines’ fitness reports, which only include notes on their performance from two of their supervisors, Berger wrote. In some cases, those supervisors do not serve in the same location as the Marines they are evaluating or don’t interact with them often.

“[Three hundred and sixty]-degree feedback, by contrast, includes the perspectives of a larger number of seniors, peers, and juniors and can include unflattering feedback that is prohibited from inclusion in a Marine’s FITREP,” Berger wrote.

This type of evaluation is already in use elsewhere in the Defense Department and it has shown to be effective in “identifying traits of toxic leadership” and helping to reduce the chances that toxic leaders will be promoted, according to Berger’s plan.

“Beginning in 2022, we will institute 360-degree feedback for leaders, on a pilot basis,” Berger wrote. “This feedback will be made available to the Marine and their reporting senior, with the aim of encouraging leadership growth. No later than 2024, we will incorporate 360-degree feedback into the selection board and assignments processes to ensure that this important input is properly considered by those selecting and assigning our future leaders.”

The Marine Corps has looked for lessons from business leaders as well as other military branches as it developed the pilot program for the 360-degree reviews, said Yvonne Reed-Carlock, a spokeswoman for Manpower and Reserve Affairs.

“The purpose of implementing 360-degree leadership reviews is to equip Marine leaders with real, honest feedback to identify their hidden strengths and unidentified weaknesses and to provide them with professional coaching to further develop and advance the capabilities of our force,” Reed-Carlock said. “To accomplish this, the pilot will solicit input from a Marine’s seniors, peers and subordinates to fully inform the picture provided to the Marine.”

The pilot program early next year is expected to include about 200 people to fine-tune the questions leaders are asked and to make sure that the right type of feedback is collected, said Lt. Col. Jim Armstrong, who works for the Marine Corps’ Manpower Management Division.

The Marines taking part in the pilot program will be field grade officers – majors, lieutenant colonels, and colonels – as well as senior enlisted leaders such as master sergeants and sergeants major, said Armstrong, who serves as the operations officer for the officer assignments branch.

Based on the pilot program’s results, Marines at other ranks and leadership positions could also receive 360-degree feedback, Armstrong said.

A 360-degree evaluation system is meant to prevent the promotion of senior leaders who may later be deemed unfit to command, such as one colonel who asked a former captain if she had been drinking before she was raped rather than referring her to trained staff for help. More robust performance evaluations may have also identified a brigadier general as a toxic leader before his subordinates reported him to the Department of Defense Inspector General’s Office, which determined that he had “disparaged, bullied, humiliated them, and devalued women.” 

For years, proponents have been calling for the Marine Corps to adopt a 360-degree evaluation system, but other military branches such as the Navy and the Air Force have used this type of feedback sparingly and for certain leaders and civilian executives.

After the Fiscal 2014 National Defense Authorization Act required the defense secretary to look into using this sort of feedback in evaluations, a study from the RAND Corporation recommended against doing so. Wow, sanity from the RAND Corporation for a change.
A sergeant instructor, evaluates officer candidates during close order drill at Marine Corps Officer Candidates School aboard Marine Corps Base Quantico, Virginia, June 21, 2019. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Lance Cpl. Phuchung Nguyen)

Many of the people whom RAND interviewed for the study, including experts within the Department of Defense, said they did not feel that 360-degree feedback was the best tool to combat toxic leadership, especially in cases where toxic leaders had no desire to change their ways.

“Participants again pointed to other ways of finding these people that would be much more cost-effective (such as through anonymous reporting channels, climate surveys, informal discussion, or inspector general complaints),” the study says.

While federal agencies have used 360-degree feedback as part of coaching and mentoring, the government as a whole – including the Defense Department – has been reluctant to include this type of feedback for promotions, said Katie Kuzminski, a senior fellow and director of the Military, Veterans, and Society Program at the Center for a New American Security think tank in Washington, D.C.

“There was a fear that if the [360-degree feedback] were used for promotions or true evaluations as opposed to personal development that there could be some challenges with that – particularly if your peers in your unit are also your competition: There would be a way to skew the outcomes to make yourself look good by making someone else look bad,” Kuzminski said.

Berger is going much further than the rest of the military by looking at how the Marine Corps can use this type of feedback for promotions, she said.

“I do think that if any service can take the lead on this front, I think it would be the Marine Corps,” Kuzminski said. “Just from a cultural perspective, I think the real value that they place on taking care of fleet really matters – and certainly for more senior positions, there’s this saying that you hear from senior folks: If you had a helicopter full of 10 general officers in the Marine Corps crash today, you would have equally high competitive talent remaining to replace them.” Really? In today’s Corps? Hell that may even help save us. Let’s make it a C-130 with 50 on board. LOL Just kidding, of course.
I trust everyone caught the name of this new plan; the “Talent Management Plan..” That says it all; when was the last time you heard anything coming out in the Corps dealing with “management.” In my day that word was toxic to Marines. Oh well, just another day in the “New” Corps. When will it end? Surely this action will help recruiting; just knowing they can have an effect on their mean Gunny should help. 

Semper Fi, Ooh-Rah, and Yut

Time for a break from the swamp and something from the Duffel Bag 

By Blondes over Baghdad

PENTAGON — A Pentagon study aimed at identifying and rooting out extremism in the armed forces has led to the conclusion that the Marine Corps should be a banned extremist group by 2022.

“The Department of Defense convened a panel to study the roots of extremism after the Jan. 6th attack on the Capitol,” said Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin. “We had to understand how a person becomes radicalized. And Jesus Christ did you know what the Marine Corps is like?”

Laura Goodwin, a researcher for the Rand Corporation, shared some data that informed the panel’s decision.

“When we asked recruits why they served in the Air Force, 54% said ‘college money,’ and 34% said ‘Patriotism or service to country,’ When we asked the same question to Marine Corps recruits, 18% cited ‘shoot a giant f**king machine gun,’ and 88% said ‘kicking in Bin Laden’s door, sneaking up to his bedroom, shooting his f***ing beard face, and throwing a grenade on his sleeping innocent wives and children just to watch them writhe in pain,” Goodwin said before pausing to take a deep breath. “That’s a hard sentence to read out loud for a normal non-Marine but there you have it in the data.”

Marine Commandant General David H. Berger disputed the study’s findings. “I don’t think we have an extremism problem in the Marine Corps,” Berger said. “I think we have an extremism tradition. Oorah! Kill! Kill! Kill!”

Experts point to groups like the Proud Boys or Antifa as extremist groups, but according to Rand, those groups are underdeveloped in recruitment, restructuring values, physical conditioning, and widespread cultural acceptance of extremist viewpoints when compared to organizations like the Marine Corps.

While there are many aspects of the Marine Corps that are good, like Motor Pool Monday and barracks parties, those activities were built on a backbone of “being ready to destroy absolutely anything, anywhere in the world, right f**king now,” officials said. Many Marines reported that they barely noticed that the organization’s foundational goals include going somewhere to indiscriminately kill, then pick up and move to another place, quickly, to indiscriminately kill, as they were more focused on getting paid to punch another man in the face.

“Blood makes the grass grow! Kill babies, oohrah!” responded Sgt. John Morgan, a 31-year-old well-adjusted man that is charming at dinner parties, when asked what the mission of the Marine Corps should be in the future.

Many of the Marines in the Rand study said they joined when they were in particularly economically and societally vulnerable situations. Joe (not his real name) explained that he had little access to education in his community and few job prospects. But when he was exposed to radical propaganda in a YouTube ad late at night, “all [he] could think about was slaying dragons and wearing white gloves and a sword.” Joe said that if he would have been able to attend college or find a good job, he probably wouldn’t have been susceptible to radicalization.

“We see this a lot,” said Goodwin. “Young men find radicalizing videos on the internet. It starts out as a curiosity, but they go deeper and deeper and find a community of extremist men, who isolate them from their friends, families, and the values they grew up on. Eventually, it escalates to the planning stage, where they find a strip mall with a Marine that matches the image from the radicalizing videos. The sad thing is that we spend a lot of money fighting extremism, but these young men are recruited for about $35 — the price of a USMC T-shirt and lunch at Buffalo Wild Wings.”

“When you find another man that thinks a K-bar dripping in human blood is ‘f**king sick,” it normalizes the behavior, Goodwin continued. “Eventually the two of you will use the same tattoo artist and marry the same stripper. At that point, you’re so entrenched it’s hard at that point to think that a nice job as an admin specialist in the Navy is an acceptable lifestyle.”

When asked for comment, Berger explained that plenty of Marines have good job prospects and healthy relationships with their families and communities, he just hadn’t found one yet, and “if you’re not a Marine you can’t understand us.”

Pentagon officials say known extremist dog whistles such as “Oorah” and “yut” have already been forbidden at bases around the world. During tattoo inspections, known extremist phrases like “Semper Fi” and eagle, globe and anchor motifs will be disqualifying. And Marine Corps Birthday balls must be open to the public and watched by neutral observers.

Plans to de-radicalize Marines and slowly transition them back to military service include encouraging them to spend time with mainstream military communities.

One promising pilot study placed Marines with Senior Airmen in air-conditioned dorms with clean running water. Within six weeks, 40% of participants stated that “They had their retirement all figured out and would just cruise on easy until then,” and 60% chose “getting an excellent evaluation,” as more important than “crushing a man’s windpipe with my bare hands.”

“The Department of Defense has shared core values of service, honor, and integrity, based on a long tradition of just war, the Geneva Conventions, ethical conduct, escalation of force and law of armed conflict,” Austin said, though his remarks were drowned out by a passing Marine platoon singing about blood making the green grass grow and putting claymores in children’s playgrounds.

While banning the Marine Corps is expected to address many aspects of military extremism and send an important message to Americans that extremism will not be tolerated, the underlying problems will be harder to address.

“I fully believe that we can ban the Marine Corps by 2022,” Berger said. “But we’re here because America wants us here. Try to stop that. YUT.”

Blondes Over Baghdad lets someone else take the top block because it’s the selfless service thing to do. She’ll go to ranger school when there’s a 3-beer policy. Follow her on Twitter at @BlondsOvrBaghd

Postscript: In case you have not realized it by now, this is a spoof from Duffel Bag.  LOL

Go Army!

Marines, you simply MUST read this unbelievable article on state of the US Army’s physical fitness. Lord we’d better not get into a fray with someone like China; they’d clean our clock. Long article, but worth the read if you really want to know the status of our “Army of One.”

Army Combat Fitness Disaster: Units Refusing to Take Test, Medics Bailing


 / 

The U.S. Army has a readiness problem the likes of which it has not seen since the draft, and one which threatens to undermine the entire institution. This problem is called the Army Combat Fitness Test. The ACFT was designed to improve the physical fitness levels of soldiers. Because it was so poorly planned, however, 84% of women failed it straightaway, and data is scarce as to whether things have improved. This is a big problem because failure of a graded physical fitness evaluation renders a soldier ineligible for promotion, locked out of specialized training that might otherwise improve a soldier’s acumen or skillset, and ultimately, risks seeing them kicked out of the Army entirely.

Meanwhile, military medical staff—surgeons, nurses, dentists, optometrists, general physicians—are, sources tell me, eyeing ACFT standards skeptically and planning to exit the Army as soon as possible. (Congress certainly seems to fear this possibility, according to language in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021, signed into law earlier this year.) A surgeon can make a lot more money in the private sector than in a uniform. This has obvious, serious implications for military readiness, as an Army without skilled doctors is an Army in serious trouble should a new war suddenly break out.

But it gets worse, as a timeline of events will demonstrate.

In October 2019, at the start of the fiscal year, most units in the active-duty Army, National Guard, and reserve component took the old Army Physical Fitness Test. Five months later, the Army suspended all “for-record” physical fitness tests because of COVID-19. In June 2020, the Sergeant Major of the Army announced that scores from the new ACFT would not count until March 2022. Then, in October 2020, the old Army Physical Fitness Test was discontinued.

In other words, by March 2022, when the ACFT is formally and officially implemented, for many soldiers, two-and-a-half years will have elapsed between physical fitness tests! Again, what was supposed to have improved readiness has instead impaired it. Because some soldiers are eligible for two-year hitches, that means there are some soldiers in the U.S. Army who will graduate from basic training and then complete an entire enlistment without ever having to take another for-record physical fitness assessment.

Because of retention fears and massive failure rates of women, Congress ordered last year that the test be halted until the Army could demonstrate that it did not discriminate based on gender. More on that in a moment.

WHAT IS THE ACFT?

In short, the Army Combat Fitness Test consists of six events:

  • Strength Dead-Lift (140-340 pounds)
  • Standing Power Throw (10-pound medicine ball)
  • Hand-Release Push-Ups
  • Sprint-Drag-Carry (sprint, drag a 90 pound sled, and then lateral shuffle then carry two 40-pound kettlebells)
  • Leg Tuck (hanging from a pull-up bar, pull yourself up and bring your knees or thighs to your elbows) or planks (2:09 to 4:20 minutes)
  • 2-Mile Run (minimum: 13:30 minutes, to maximum: 21:00 minutes)

(Just for the record, I called the ACFT a looming disaster in 2018. Sometimes I hate being right.)

WHERE DID IT COME FROM?

Every so often, the Defense Department decides with utter conviction who the new enemy will be, and prepares for war against them, and then the actual enemies come along and sucker punch the United States. In 1990, the U.S. had the best army on Earth for fighting the Soviet Union, and then Saddam Hussein decided to invade Kuwait. Months before 9/11, the Pentagon was planning for space warfare, and then terrorists used boxcutters to bring down airliners on U.S. soil. When Special Forces arrived in Afghanistan, they didn’t need intercontinental ballistic missile shields; they needed horses, and used cavalry tactics not seen since the Spanish American War. Now we are preparing to fight a nice, big, old fashioned land war in China, or even on U.S. soil. Consequently, I expect we will be invading an island country in the Atlantic or slogging it out in Antarctica any day now.

But from this new defense posture was borne the need for a new physical fitness test to test for the sorts of war-fighting events a soldier might expect to perform when life imitated Red Dawn. Even in garrison, Ft. Lewis to Ft. Devens, sea to shining sea, soldiers needed to be ready. People’s Liberation Army paratroopers could fill the skies over the Statue of Liberty at a moment’s notice.

Thus the abandonment of the allegedly inferior Army Physical Fitness Test in favor of the newly-dubbed Army Combat Fitness Test (ACFT), whose new name is much more in fitting with an Army rebranding that began in 2001 with the black beret, led to the ill-fitting black (and quickly discontinued) Army Service Uniform, and has since yielded (sigh) “Warrior Restaurants.” (At this point I have to believe that the Marines have secretly taken control of the Army and are doing everything they can to annihilate the dignity of soldiers and drive high school grads into the loving arms of Marine Corps recruiters.) Ooh-Rah!

What the heck is a “Warrior Restaurant? Is that what the Army calls their chow halls? Oh Lord, give me a break

THE ARMY COMBAT FITNESS TEST IS EXPENSIVE

You might have noticed in the above list that an awful lot of hardware is necessary for this test. (Much more is needed than that, in fact, so that multiple soldiers might take the test simultaneously.) Just so that we have some perspective on things: To do the old Army Physical Fitness Test, all a company needed was a clipboard, a pencil, and a stopwatch. Each of those items could be purchased new at the dollar store, total price: $3. (Let’s round it up to $10, though, to include the mileage on someone’s POV.) Two hours later, you would have a complete evaluation of your unit’s physical fitness levels.

I remind you of this because the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command took a good hard look at the APFT, its three-dollar price tag and the generation of hardened infantry soldiers, special operations forces, and others, and said, no. No no no this won’t do at all. What we really need (and I cannot believe I am about to type these words) to evaluate the physical fitness of soldiers is $68 million worth of equipment and a mandatory testing ground whose conditions are rarely found outside of Biosphere 2.

CHANGE FOR THE SAKE OF CHANGE

To be clear: I have never once in my life seen a soldier max the old Army Physical Fitness Test and not be in superb shape. You show me a soldier with a 300 on his or her score sheet, and I’ll show you someone who is lean and mean and fit to fight.

But to be generous, perhaps TRADOC looked at soldier fitness and believed that the Army just wasn’t where it needed to be. They are probably right! But rather than cripple Army readiness with an absurd Homer-mobile of a “combat fitness” test, they could have simply raised the minimum scores of the already demonstrably effective Army Physical Fitness Test. What once was a minimum 60 in an event could have been elevated to a 70 or higher. That meeting would have looked something like this: “Hmm, this 25-year-old male only has to do forty pushups to demonstrate upper body strength. That seems low, and he is ill-equipped for the rigors of modern warfare and the gear a soldier must carry. Let’s raise the minimum to sixty-five pushups.” Total price to roll out the new test: Whatever an email message costs in electricity. Three cents?

No. Instead, the Army said that we definitely need hexagonal trap bars, pulling sleds, medicine balls, kettlebells, and 550 pounds of plates. It just makes sense! I’m surprised they didn’t mandate that soldiers flip and roll those giant tires that CrossFit gyms love so much. Scratch that—I’m not surprised at all. That would actually be a useful battlefield skill, and something that any soldier, his or her entire post under attack in sudden, full scale war, might actually need to do. LMTV tires are no joke.

This is where it gets worse. If you are in the Army Reserve or National Guard—i.e., the majority of the Army—you are just out of luck in the new physical fitness regime. You only have access to the training equipment two days per month, during drill, and Planet Fitness doesn’t stock sleds. But don’t worry, 17-year-old E-2 who makes minimum wage in your civilian job! You can purchase a complete ACFT equipment kit for $2,350. When those enemy tanks roll across Kansas corn fields, you want to be ready, don’t you?

SOLVING THE ACFT LEG TUCK

I don’t even know how to explain this without a flowchart, but I am a professional and will give it a go. Previously, the ACFT mandated a testing event called a leg tuck to determine the core strength of a soldier. The problem: 72% of women were failing it. The solution TRADOC has provided: Soldiers can perform a plank as an alternative to the leg tuck. That seems fair, but…

According to a letter sent out by the Sergeant Major of the Army: “Each Soldier will indicate which core strength test event they will do before the test begins. The reason we are keeping the Leg Tuck, and adding the Plank, is that the Leg Tuck is a better correlation to fitness requirements for Warrior Tasks and Battle Drills (WTBDs) and Soldier common tasks.  By making the Plank a fully graded, alternate assessment, we are working to give Soldiers who are currently struggling with the Leg Tuck, a chance to succeed on the ACFT, while adapting their physical readiness training to the Army’s changing culture of fitness.” Oh, that’s a good move. LOL

So which is it? Are we designing a test to give absolute, rock solid evidence of a soldier’s fitness for modern warfare, or are we just… making things up? Because it’s a binary situation. If WTBD proficiency—things like movement under fire, evacuating casualties, and so on—is a necessary prerequisite for modern warfare (and I agree it is), then why are you yielding on leg tucks?

It’s almost like the leg tuck event is just made up, a metric and not the metric. Perhaps—it sure seems that way—that the entire ACFT is a collection of expensive, invented tests that might, yes, improve the fitness of some, but at the expense of the whole. Because while it would be nice if cooks, helicopter mechanics, paralegals, and linguists could, at a moment’s notice, graduate Ranger school, maybe—just maybe—retention with a basic level of physical fitness is more important than the ability to achieve the fetal position while hanging from a pull-up bar. The Army is losing medical doctors to this thing. I have profound respect for Cav scouts, but I don’t want one performing surgery on me.

As one insider who spoke under the condition of anonymity told me last year: “This test was made up out of thin air. There is no ‘raising’ or ‘lowering’ of standards because this test is not a standard. It is a made up, make-believe set of criteria that never been used before to determine the combat fitness of any soldier, sailor, airman, or Marine. It’s totally made up. And so we don’t know if this truly measures combat fitness. What we do know is the Army Physical Fitness Test has been used for the last 30 years, and we have put hundreds of thousands of people into combat successfully based on it. The [new] ACFT is a made-up set of exercises and repetitions that has absolutely no basis in a real-life combat experience because it’s never been required before.”

CONGRESS GETS INVOLVED

Last year, Congress issued an edict to the U.S. Army to get to the bottom of the ACFT fiasco. Among other things, representatives wanted to know “the extent, if any, to which the test would adversely impact members of the Army stationed or deployed to climates or areas with conditions that make prohibitive the conduct of outdoor physical training on a frequent or sustained basis,” and “the extent, if any, to which the test would affect recruitment and retention in critical support military occupational specialties of the Army, such as medical personnel.”

Officials tasked the RAND Corporation, an independent, non-profit think tank in Washington D.C., with this endeavor. But I was curious how RAND’s experts would do this. Would they send observers to take notes from the field, or would they run statistical analyses on ACFT results thus far, or would they build their own group of non-Army test-takers, or perhaps do some combination of all this?

So I reached out to the RAND Corporation, and a spokesperson could confirm only that they are, in fact, conducting research on the Army Combat Fitness Test, but that said research was in the very early stages, and in any event, they can’t talk about it until their work is complete. Next, I reached out to the Army, who has yet to respond to my request, aside from acknowledging its receipt. (If and when they respond, I will update this story.)

There is a problem with all this. Because the ACFT is not presently mandatory per Congress, units are not taking it. But the Army is desperate for more data points to prove that the ACFT is good. (I mean they’ve got no place to go but up!) In the same letter from the Sergeant Major of the Army, he practically begged units to get with the program—to jump on the team and come on in for the big win:

“The refinements will be data driven and it’s critical we make training for, and taking the ACFT, one of our highest priorities. As of last week, only 25% of the Army had taken the test. We cannot, and should not, make final policy decisions based this limited data set..”  I assume “data driven” means if enough percentage don’t score well or even pass, we will lower the standards.

Congress is waiting, and the RAND study looms. The ACFT stumbles onward, while the waistlines of some soldiers expand, surgeons plan their exits, and readiness reaches a nadir: all problems invented by a test, which then claimed it could solve them.

UPDATE: Army spokesperson Matthew Leonard says, regarding the RAND study of the ACFT: “The Army asked the RAND Arroyo Center to independently review the Army’s development of the ACFT and contribute to ongoing discussions regarding its implementation. RAND began conducting the ACFT implementation study in first quarter FY21. The Army is providing all applicable training data through the Digital Training Management System (DTMS), which is the Army’s system for recording planned and completed training. All Army units will continue to train and test the ACFT and enter scoring data into DTMS. During the study period only RAND and select Army research elements will have access to DTMS data.”

Oh well, otherwise all’s well in the Woke Army Swamp today.