111,95 €
124,39 €
-10% with code: EXTRA
Foreign Military Advisor Proficiency
Foreign Military Advisor Proficiency
111,95
124,39 €
  • We will send in 10–14 business days.
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 t…
  • SAVE -10% with code: EXTRA

Foreign Military Advisor Proficiency (e-book) (used book) | bookbook.eu

Reviews

Description

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.

EXTRA 10 % discount with code: EXTRA

111,95
124,39 €
We will send in 10–14 business days.

The promotion ends in 15d.18:45:59

The discount code is valid when purchasing from 10 €. Discounts do not stack.

Log in and for this item
you will receive 1,24 Book Euros!?

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.

Reviews

  • No reviews
0 customers have rated this item.
5
0%
4
0%
3
0%
2
0%
1
0%
(will not be displayed)