Publisher's Synopsis
Will centralized screening and selection improve foreign military advisor performance on the battlefield? The Army's 2009 doctrine on security force assistance indicates selection is necessary to find suitable Soldiers for the mission. The factors affecting advisor team performance include the complex mission and environment, team leadership, team development training, and Soldier attributes. Recent advisors indicate the lack of appropriate leadership skills and personal attributes of advisor team members are the primary factors affecting cohesion on teams. Special Forces (SF) assumed principal responsibility for the foreign internal defense mission post-Vietnam, but the global war on terrorism and competing SF mission requirements created demands once again for advisor conventional force manning. SF recruiting units screen all candidates to ensure they meet a high benchmark for foreign military advising; however, the Army as a whole has not employed this same procedure for conventional force Soldiers. A more deliberate and rigorous screening and selection process for conventional force military advisors will improve advisor team leadership, cohesion and combat performance. The Army should maintain the current advisory team construct, but the SF model for centrally screening, selecting and qualifying foreign military advisors should be incorporated, with modifications. Human Resources Command (HRC) should retain current responsibility for manning teams, but with specific changes to the selection, assignment process and policy.
