Profiles of Strengths and Weaknesses of Task Force Performance.

Abstract

Military analysts extracted task ratings for NTC offense missions from take-home packages for nine AC and nine RC task forces. The ratings were aggregated to the level of critical combat functions (CCF). Both components had the same general pattern of strengths and weaknesses: CCFs with a high proportion of individual tasks related to planning and preparation were relative strengths; CCFs that require synchronization during execution were relative weaknesses. While AC units had consistently higher ratings, only five CCFs were dramatically different: Conduct intelligence planning, collect information, process information, disseminate intelligence, and mortars. CCF ratings for RC task forces were correlated with a METT-T index. The two Maneuver CCFs (Tactical movement and Engage enemy: direct fire and maneuver) had significant correlations. The authors conclude that the procedures provide useful data to support quantitative analysis and that the detail provided by the CCF level of aggregation allows a more useful analysis of training needs than a BOS level of aggregation.

Open PDF

Document Details

Document Type
Technical Report
Publication Date
Jul 01, 1996
Accession Number
ADA313664

Entities

People

  • James A. Huffman
  • Michael A. Creen
  • Patrick Ford

Organizations

  • Braddock Dunn & McDonald

Tags

Communities of Interest

  • Human Systems
  • Weapons Technologies

DTIC Thesaurus Topics

  • Air Defense
  • Artillery
  • Combat Operations
  • Correlation Analysis
  • Fire Support
  • Indirect Fire
  • Intelligence Planning
  • Lessons Learned
  • Maneuvers
  • Military Research
  • Security
  • Social Sciences
  • Statistical Analysis
  • Task Forces
  • Task Performance And Analysis
  • Training
  • Warfare

Readers

  • Geospatial Intelligence and Artificial Intelligence Analytics
  • Military Science
  • Organizational Psychology.