Army Force Management School, Part II

Timothy Keating, an MPRI
employee, one of the
AFMS instructors.

Just finished Day 3 of the The Army Force Management Course (AFMC) at Fort Belvoir.  The AFMC is one of the courses of instruction taught at Fort Belvoir's Army Force Management School.

Here's an overview of what we have covered in three days--



We took a test on the first day, a student self-assessment.  Fifty questions.  The questions represented an A to Z sampling of the subjects to be covered in the course, but focused on three areas:

• The terms and definitions of Army force management.
• The purpose, design and sequence of the Army Force Management Model (a complicated chart that essentially boils the whole 4-week course down to a single page ... er, large page.
• The sequence of the Force Development Process.

The instructors told us that the historic average is about 43%.  Results were posted using students' last four SSN numbers instead of names.  Out of a class of nineteen, one person scored a 66.  Four, including me, scored 60.  No one scored below 40.  So, I am figuring that this class is a little above average.

After an overview of the Force Management Model, the Force Development Process, and the Army Organizational Life Cycle Model, we learned about Title 10 of the U.S. Code and the Department of the Army headquarters' roles, functions, and missions. We had several hour's instruction on strategic planning, learning about the National Security Strategy, the National Defense Strategy, the Guidance for the Employment of the Force, and the Defense Planning and Programming Guidance.  These documents, developed and published at the national level, drive strategic planning within each of the service branches.

We learned about the Quadrennial Defense Review.  The principle purposes of the QDR, which addresses four fundamental national security challenges (traditional, irregular, disruptive, and catastrophic) are to:

• Develop strategic guidance for the DOD.
• Lay out an agenda for developing needed future capabilities.
• Forecast defense requirements 20 years into the future.
• Satisfy a statutory requirement.

The most recent edition of the QDR, published in 2010, identifies the requirement for U.S. Forces to prevail, prevent, prepare, and preserve force capabilities in a variety of full spectrum operations spanning both steady-state and surge conditions.  Along with the Ballistic Missile Defense Review and the Nuclear Posture Review, the QDR serves as the basis for the development of the Defense Planning and Programming Guidance.

We covered joint strategic planning and learned about the Global Force Management Process.  Tuesday afternoon was spent going over the Army's Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution process, otherwise known as the PPBE.  I faltered just a bit, during the PPBE classes, in my continuing struggle with the Z monster.

This morning we had an overview of the reserve components, the National Guard and the Army Reserve.  We also had a very interesting class on the Army Modular Force. The Army began its transformation to a modular force structure shortly before I retired. That transformation continued after my retirement and, today, is still not quite complete. Not knowing before I retired that I would continue to work for the Army (as both a contractor and a civilian employee) I didn't bother to learn the modular structure. Besides, in the early going, the Army used a different model than the one it uses now. It was confusing and, as a doctrine writer, I have frequently found myself trying to put all the pieces together and make sense out of all of it.  The class this morning on the Army Modular Force really helped.