Commanders' Assessment of Unit Effectiveness Measures
Abstract
The purpose of this research was to investigate how the important area of unit effectiveness is assessed in the Army. Data was collected from a sample of senior Army commanders regarding their perceptions of existing standard Army measures of battalion effectiveness. These measures naturally classify into three groups: (1) command indicators (e.g., AWOL rates, Articles 15); (2) readiness measures (e.g., equipment rated ready, annual general inspections); and (3) the personal judgments of subordinate Army leaders. Senior Army leaders chose those measures from all of these groups which provided for them the most accurate picture of a battalion's effectiveness. It was found that military leaders not only have predetermined attitudes toward all existing effectiveness measures, but that even when this rater bias is controlled, there exists a definite preference for specific groups of measures. The command indicators were found to have the least perceived validity and utility for Army leaders, while personal judgments and readiness measures were rated significantly higher for their credibility in assessing battalion effectiveness.
Document Details
- Document Type
- Technical Report
- Publication Date
- Jan 01, 1981
- Accession Number
- ADP001339
Entities
People
- Francis E. O'mara
- Susan E. Kerner-hoeg
Organizations
- U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences