Table of Contents
Introduction
Having a competent army is synonymous to sovereignty. That is because armies define the significant ability of a nation concerning the protection of its boundaries. As such, the military is said only to have one mandate, that of protecting a country together with its people and belongings. With this regard, adequate training is critical in ensuring that an army remains competent enough to handle different threats that nation experiences. An excellent example of how the military can define a nation’s sovereignty can be seen by looking at the twenty-first-century US. The country, being a superpower have had an increasing number of properties to safeguard, as well as increasing enemies that it must keep watch on them. As such, the following discussion seeks to describe the importance of an intensive army training process, more so through the use of Training Management Process, and how that makes an army both tactically and technically competent.
The Relevance of The Training Management Process in Today’s Army
Training Management Process is said by Norman (2012, 134-160) to involve a predetermined and progressive, sequential, continuous Army values based training process that establish competence as well as confidence in soldiers and civilians thus making them able to act decisively in times of war. As such, VanVactor (2007, 133-138) says that such level of competence is achieved by shaping the security environment, ensuring a prompt response, facilitating easy mobilization of the army, being able to adequately conduct forcible entry operations, being able to maintain sustained ground dominance as well as supporting civil authorities. Moreover, VanVactor says that threats to world’s nation’s army have increased due to the witnessed technological advancements and that forces every country to boost its vigilance. Additionally, Godinez & Barry (2015, 93-100) maintains that Training Management Process focuses on the use of scientific principles of training about resource efficiencies, that is soldiers, ammunition, and time, measured based on standards and tasks. Furthermore, Amazon Book Review (2012, 34-41) argues that appreciating that training for warfare makes the number one priority concerning peace maintenance is vital for any army.
As such, the author maintains that closing any gaps between war-ground performance, soldiers’ skills, and warfighting leadership, which has been a significant challenge to many armies, is of paramount in winning today’s warfare. Such, he says, can only be achieved by incorporating Training Management Process to ensure a balance between training process and battleground training executions. Notwithstanding, Doxford and Tony (2012, 2012, 279-297) reiterate that utilizing science while training as well as going to war, which constitutes Training Management Process, aids an army to dominate the fight and thus emerge the winner with the least number of casualties or losses. That is because soldiers can utilize the available resources, including skills and ammunition, in the most technical way possible, while their leaders can plan adequately before, during and after the war. Such, the author says, gives an army a collective confidence and trust in accomplishing any mission successfully (ADRP 7-0 Training Units and Developing Leaders, 2012).
Importance of Rehearsals, Pre-Execution Checks, and After Action Reviews
As stated earlier, the Army plays a significant role in safeguarding a nation and thus taking its activities for granted amounts to committing suicide. As such, a standard process exists within the Army where potential soldiers are first recruited based on given credentials before they can start training. Moreover, these soldiers learn both basic and non-basic fighting skills during their training after which they are ranked in respective army positions. At this level, the just trained soldiers are said by Carvelli (2013, 14-16) to be able to execute some of the learned skills, which may become dormant if not applied with time, or outdated if not updated. To avoid such drawbacks, Carvelli (2013, 14-16) says that it is essential that army soldiers continuously rehearse the skills and concepts learned, during which they can perfect or update them for competence purposes. Other than conducting rehearsals, Sanderson & Scott (2007, 71-78) further maintains that the army must conduct pre-execution checks. These are done both on the soldiers as well as other resources for precision purposes. Consequently, it is from such pre-execution checks where the army can fix possible gaps that may affect their confidence and general performance. Moreover, after-action reviews help the military to audit their performance after a war. As such, that aids in correcting some mistakes as well as appreciating training needs that they need to improve their fighting capabilities (O’Brien & Michael, 2014, 54-59).
How Web-Based Training Supports the Training Management Process
Web-based training, also known as e-training, refers to a system of training where information is sent to the intended persons via the internet. With this respect, the recipient of the information must have a web-enabled device that can receive as well as display the training information. Consequently, instructor-facilitated web-based training serves as an essential tool in Training Management Process because of its ability to reach far distant soldiers and civilians participating in far located battlegrounds. With this regard, commanders leading troops headed to war in unknown areas can readily access information from civilians through the internet, after which they can ‘e-train’ the respective soldiers concerning essential tactics required. Moreover, army troops fighting in far distances, as well those training in far remote areas can also benefit from e-training by being equipped with internet-enabled devices that train them from a central point. Such, aids in the timely delivery of concepts and skills that in turn boost army competence (Mahoney-Norris & John 2012, 20-25) and (Army Training Network).
- ADRP 7-0 Training Units and Developing Leaders; August 2012
- Amazon Book Review. FM 3-21.10 The Infantry Rifle Company, July 2006, CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 2012, pp. 34-41.
- Carvelli, Michael P. “Rehearsals: The Lost Art.” Engineer, vol. 43, no. 3, Sep-Dec2013, pp. 14-16.
- Doxford, David, and Tony Hill. “Land use for Military Training in the UK: The Current Situation, Likely Developments and Possible Alternatives.” Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, vol. 41, no. 3, 2012, pp. 279-297, ABI/INFORM Collection.
- Godinez, Eileen and Barry B. Leslie. “Army Civilian Leadership Development.” Adult Learning, vol. 26, no. 3, Aug. 2015, pp. 93-100.
- Mahoney-Norris, Kathleen A. and John Ackerman. “PME and Online Education in the Air Force.” JFQ: Joint Force Quarterly, no. 67, 2012 4th Quarter, pp. 20-25.
- Norman, Wade M. FM 6-0, Commander and Staff Organization and Operations, 2012, pp. 134-160.
- O’Brien, Rory P. and Michael H. Liscano. “A Decisive Action Training Environment for Lieutenants.” Army Sustainment, vol. 46, no. 1, Jan/Feb2014, pp. 54-59.
- Sanderson, Jeffrey R. and Scott J. Akerley. “FOCUSING TRAINING the Big Five for Leaders.” Military Review, vol. 87, no. 4, Jul/Aug2007, pp. 71-78.
- VanVactor, Jerry D. “Risk Mitigation through A Composite Risk Management Process: The U.S. Army Risk Assessment.” Organization Development Journal, vol. 25, no. 2, 2007, pp.