Project Solarium: What are the most important issues the Army is facing right now?

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 14 Apr 2015 11:41:27 -0400

"In the summer of President Eisenhower’s first year in office he commissioned Project Solarium. His purpose was to bring together a collection of experts to debate and propose alternate directions for U.S. Foreign Policy with regard to the Soviet threat. In 1953 the Cold War was just beginning and the Korean War was coming to an indecisive conclusion. It was clear to President Eisenhower that the United States needed to carefully develop a comprehensive Foreign Policy Strategy. It was code named Solarium because the idea for the project occurred in the White House Solarium, a sun room on the 3rd floor where President Eisenhower enjoyed spending leisure time. At the time, Project Solarium observed very strict operations security and was only declassified in 1985. After its declassification, many historians and scholars have pointed to Project Solarium as a superb example of strategic planning that should be emulated."

I would like to see the Project Rally Point Solarium kick off. We have a great deal of professional insight here in this group. If you had to pick the top 3-6 issues the Army is facing today, what would they be, and why?

My opinion is as follows;

1) Talent Management: How to retain and progress the right people.
2) Career Management: Reshaping the way we control our careers. The much needed transition to a corporate style career management system
3) Reshaping the Army Culture: The Army's internal AO campaign
4) Training: Effective training with a restrictive budget/Training Focus
5) Reshaping the Army's Benefits: Retirement Savings option
6) Mitigating the degradation of Combat Readiness: Remaining effective as we draw down.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Apr 14 at 2015 12:22 PM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Tue, 14 Apr 2015 12:22:02 -0400

Quo Vadis? (Where are you going?)

or more importantly "What path are we on?"

That needs to be the first question we ask, which gives us a destination, which in turn will gives us several intermediate questions.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2015 12:45 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 14 Apr 2015 12:45:17 -0400

I wish the current POTUS, would do just that, stay in DC, THINKING of strategy and not political minutae, less golfing and fundraising/hollywood visits. With the first ambassador dying on duty in decades, and lack of security, the losing of Iraq, Isis growing, Iran nuclear plans, perhaps losing Afghanistan as well, racial turmoil in the homeland, and all the security issues, there could be better spent doing the job, and not jumping for a picture opportunity.

Response by CPT Bruce Rodgers made Apr 14 at 2015 12:48 PM

CPT Bruce Rodgers — Tue, 14 Apr 2015 12:48:49 -0400

PT belts?

Response by Capt Richard I P. made Apr 14 at 2015 1:50 PM

Capt Richard I P. — Tue, 14 Apr 2015 13:50:08 -0400

CPT Private RallyPoint Member You get the best RP topic of the day award.

This is exactly what should be discussed here. And I think the points you've made on priorities for what the Military needs to focus on are well made.

Response by SGT Marika Waiters made Apr 14 at 2015 1:56 PM

SGT Marika Waiters — Tue, 14 Apr 2015 13:56:15 -0400

I think one of the biggest issues that all of the services is facing is the injection of the overly political correctness that plagues civilian society! Armed forces cannot run under the "civilities" of the civilian population! It's the MILITARY, got crying out loud! Not the girl scouts! I think this in large part die to the fact that our POTUS(es) have no military background; and neither does most of Congress!

Response by SPC David S. made Apr 14 at 2015 2:34 PM

SPC David S. — Tue, 14 Apr 2015 14:34:44 -0400

I see a number of opportunities that are complex and challenging:

1) Army sustainment - Particularly related to personnel. As many of the external forces that play a part in the making of a successful service member recruit are out of the Army's domain, such as laws for the legalization of drugs and education policies that pander to minimal standards, the Army needs to figure out how to do more with less. Maybe multiple MOS's will be required, cross training, larger reserve and guard numbers to address the area.

2) Acquisition process - The current system has digressed into a series of capitulating failures that the Army seems unable and unwilling to fix. The current system for all branches is more interested in aggressive resistance to the reporting of problems, suppression of failed test results, public declaration of success where none was justified, and the absence of accountability.

3) Strategy for asymmetrical war - To me it seems that we to often use a traditional strategy when engaging an asymmetrical force. We have billion dollar comm systems while the enemy is using snap chat. Seems to me we should be working on low tech solutions for low tech problems as apposed to using a tomahawk cruise missile to take out a guy jockeying a camel wagon.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Apr 14 at 2015 7:50 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Tue, 14 Apr 2015 19:50:30 -0400

How to win counterinsurgency wars, keep abreast of future technologies, change our doctrine, TTPs if needed.

Response by LTC Yinon Weiss made Apr 15 at 2015 9:27 AM

LTC Yinon Weiss — Wed, 15 Apr 2015 09:27:33 -0400

I would generally agree with the list as you presented it, and I think this is a great topic. I think talent management is the #1 challenge we face right now. The world is not just changing quickly, but is changing more quickly each year. The military is falling way behind the rest of the country in terms of how talent is managed and retained, and that can create serious long term problems. Those that have been "on the inside" of the military for a very long time may not have a perspective on just how disconnected the military has become in terms of talent management best practices.

I would also add what I am observing as an obsession with self-preservation across the force as we see cuts and draw down, with each unit or branch fighting for relevancy and numbers in order to justify their existence and budget. The arguments tend to be motivated by simple self-preservation and not necessarily for national military objectives.

Most of these discussions tend to be "we need to show better numbers so somebody else gets cut and not us" -- and most of the discussions are therefore about how we can position ourselves for self-preservation rather than how do we position ourselves to accomplish the needed mission. Instead of focusing on organizational goals like combat readiness, leadership development, and training, there is a tendency to focus on meeting administrative metrics and quasi-poltiical goals in order to make the sub-organization look better than the next. Thus we are competing against each other more than we are trying to prepare to fight an enemy.

The above is unfortunately probably a natural human tendency, but I would like to see less of it. Ideally, we should all be thinking "what is best for the Army and our Nation" rather than "how do I preserve our budget?" -- The problem right now is that there is not a clear vision for our military in context of foreign policy, at least not at the level I see, so it's easier for people to gain tunnel vision for "what is best for my organization?" rather than best for our military and country.

I invite SGM Matthew Quick, CSM Michael J. Uhlig, and CSM Private RallyPoint Member to add their own separate response to the original question. I would love to hear your thoughts.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 23 at 2015 3:53 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 23 Apr 2015 15:53:18 -0400

I totally agree with you and I invite you to review my solution on #2. If you would please search iPCS Army on Facebook and post your thoughts there, I would greatly appreciate it. Good or bad your input matters.