Army Professional Expertise And Jurisdictions

The author provides a framework intended for use by the Army's strategic leaders. But, it also should be a point of departure for debate among all members of the profession. The most important purpose of this framework is to provide a mechanism for HOW TO THINK about Army expert knowledge and jurisdictions. He offers some general recommendations derived from my application of the framework and its logic. These recommendations represent just one possible view. Ultimately, the strategic leaders of the Army will decide priorities and boundaries.

Changes in the international security environment and in technology challenge leaders to define the Army's role for the future. Effective strategic leadership of the Army profession will be an essential component of successful transformation. To serve American society effectively, strategic leaders of the profession must define, prioritize, and the expert knowledge of the profession, clarify the jurisdictions within which this knowledge applies, and then develop professionals to apply this knowledge. There are three main reasons to map and prioritize the Army's professional expertise and jurisdictions: * Facilitate choices about the use of constrained resources; * Reestablish the Army's collective professional identity; and, * Move beyond the concept of "full spectrum dominance." This monograph provides a framework intended for use by the Army's strategic leaders. But it also should be a point of departure for debate among all members of the profession. The most important purpose of this framework is to provide a mechanism for HOW TO THINK about Army expert knowledge and jurisdictions. This monograph offers some general recommendations derived from my application of the framework and its logic. These recommendations represent just one possible view. Ultimately, the strategic leaders of the Army will decide priorities and boundaries. Recommendations include: * Eliminating of combat service support branches as basic branches for commissioned officer accession. * Strengthening pre-commissioning standards for combat and combat support officers to include certified military training and educational components. * Establishing clearer qualitative standards for assignment, promotion, and retention of commissioned officers (in terms of physical capacity, psychological capacity, and demonstrated performance). * Refocusing the officer career management and education system. * Developing coherent intellectual justifications and defense of jurisdictions related to the leadership of Army soldiers in the organized application of coercive force (war, peace enforcement, peacekeeping). * Better articulating reasons for avoiding jurisdictions that do not require unique Army expertise (humanitarian assistance, disaster relief, homeland security).

The author provides a framework intended for use by the Army's strategic leaders. But, it also should be a point of departure for debate among all members of the profession. The most important purpose of this framework is to provide a mechanism for HOW TO THINK about Army expert knowledge and jurisdictions. He offers some general recommendations derived from my application of the framework and its logic. These recommendations represent just one possible view. Ultimately, the strategic leaders of the Army will decide priorities and boundaries.

With the soldiers of the Army deployed to over 120 countries and executing a wide variety of missions, the Army as a profession is being stretched to its limits. Richard Lacquement takes note of these developments and calls for a clarifi cation of what exactly the Army "profession" entails. His mapping of the profession's expert knowledge provides a framework to continue the debate on the jurisdictions of the Army profession. The recommendations he presents are radical and thought provoking. While there may not be a consensus on his conclusions, this monograph serves the important role of stimulating thought and debate on the Army profession.

Who are the future members of the Army profession and how is their competence to be certified to their client, the American people? This is a contemporary analysis of the Army profession, its knowledge and expertise, with conclusions and policy recommendations.

"This monograph surveys the history of the Army's professional ethic, focusing primarily on the Army officer corps. It assesses today's strategic, professional, and ethical environment. Then it argues that a clear statement of the Army officers' professional ethic is especially necessary in a time when the Army is stretched and stressed as an institution. The Army officer corps has both a need and an opportunity to better define itself as a profession, forthrightly to articulate its professional ethic, and clearly to codify what it means to be a military professional."--Summary.

Changes in the international security environment and changes in technology challenge the nature and role of the Army for the future. Focused, strategic leadership of the profession will be an essential component of successful transformation. To serve American society effectively, strategic leaders of the profession knowledge of the profession, the jurisdictions within which this knowledge applies, and then develop the professionals to apply this knowledge. In short, the nature of the professional environment has changed; therefore, the Army profession must change.

In 1950, when he commissioned the first edition of The Armed Forces Officer, Secretary of Defense George C. Marshall told its author, S.L.A. Marshall, that "American military officers, of whatever service, should share common ground ethically and morally." In this new edition, the authors methodically explore that common ground, reflecting on the basics of the Profession of Arms, and the officer's special place and distinctive obligations within that profession and especially to the Constitution.