The Special Operations Forces of the United States are arguably the best in the world. The United States Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) is comprised of men and women from all four branches of the armed services. They are a special breed of people that undergo some of the most intense physical training and psychological stress anyone can put themselves through; and they volunteer for it. The few lucky ones make it through their respective services’ selection phase the first time around. Many must go back through two or three or maybe more times to get selected; again, they volunteer. The vast majority of service members that attempt a Special Operations Forces selection assessment are one and done. What motivates some to keep going back, never taking no for an answer, especially with a 70% attrition rate.
The research questions I posed was does the selection process for our country’s Special Operations Forces (SOF) focus on a candidate’s physical prowess alone or does it consider personality aspects as well? Do they factor in equally? Is there a specific personality type the U.S. military looks for when selecting members for its special operations forces? If so, what psychological measuring instruments are used and what is their effectiveness? I base my theory that personality type is a huge factor in the selection process for SOF on information I’ve learned first-hand from people I know in the Special Operations Community.
What I have personally witnessed in my time in the Army; it is not one’s physical strength alone that will determine their selectability into a SOF career field. A colleague of mine attended the Army’s three week Special Forces Assessment and Selection (SFAS) and made it all the way through...
... middle of paper ...
... Valentine, G. J., Dewey G. I., Allentoff H. L., & Wesolowski M. A. (1988). Selection and assessment of special forces qualification course candidates: preliminary issues (ARI Research Note 88-37). Fort Benning, GA.
5) Pleban R. J., Allentoff H. L., & Thompson T. J. (1989). Preliminary assessment of selected predictors of special forces qualification course success (Research Report 1539).
Fort Benning, GA.
6) Prusaczyk W. K. & Goldberg G. M. (2002). Organization, psychological, and training aspects of special operations forces. Medical aspects of harsh environments (Vol. 2) (pp. 1166-1193). Fort Sam Houston, TX.
7) Saier W. E. (1995). An assessment of assessment: is selective manning right for USAF special operations aircrew? (Unpublished master thesis). Maxwell Air Force Base, AL.
8) The History Channel (2009) The brain [DVD]. United States: A&E Home Studio.
The United States Army has been a leader in military prowess on the world stage since its inception in 1775, and with such a record, it is reasonably assumed that there must be solid foundation within the organization working to maintain the high level of performance. The Noncommissioned Officer Corps is one institution within the Army that serves as a large portion of this foundation that makes it the fighting force that it has always been, and the noncommissioned officers have been an integral piece since the very inception of the Army. The Prussian General Friedrich Wilhelm von Steuben, organizer of the Noncommissioned Officer Corps, encapsulated this idea when he coined the noncommissioned officer (NCO) as the backbone of the Army. (Arms, 1991) In an Army that is continuously adjusting to world around it while maintaining its status as the military leader to all other nations, the Noncommissioned Officer Corps has always provided the platform for continuity through a growing rank system based on its original core, an evolving training program to develop effective leaders, and a creed that moves us forward while remembering the rich history of the corps that came before us.
1. Purpose. To provide Special Forces Warrant Officer Advance Course (SFWOAC) Class 002-16 a concise overview of ADRP 6-22 Army Leadership.
CF03, Critical Thinking Student Guide. (2013). Maxwell-Gunter AFB. Thomas N. Barnes Center for Enlisted Education (AETC).
The surroundings of Counterintelligence (CI) duties requires that CI Special Agents hold the highest levels of proficiency, maturity, moral values, and honorable intelligibility. All newly graduates from Counterintelligence Special Agent Course (CISAC) will be part of the Counterintelligence Probationary Program (CIPP) in the accordance with AR 381-20. The CIPP is an evaluation and mentoring program that allows Evaluating Agent (EA) to employ the CI Probationary Agent (PA) in a manner that allows growth in development. The PAs are retained in the 35L military occupational specialty upon completion of the CIPP. The real question that lingers in every PA’s mind is; how does the evaluation process take place?
However, development starts day one with training. Therefore, the Soldiers have to be experts who have assumed the character and identity of the profession; professionalism in Soldiers enables them to perform their duties with lots of motivation and inspiration. For example, 42A - The Human Resources (HR) Sergeant supervises, performs personnel and administrative functions in support of company, battery, and troop; detachments at division, corps, and echelons above corps must master their skill level in an effort to be a subject matter expert in their profession. The functions of Human Resource support four fundamental competencies: Man the Force (ex. Strength reporting), Provide HR Services (ex. Postal operations), Coordinate Personnel Support (ex. Morale, welfare, and Recreation), and Conduct HR Planning and Operations (ex. Planning and operations) in which a HR personnel must accomplish to support the mission. As a result, a professional Soldier should meet very high standards of a profession, for example character, competence, expertise and morality to fulfil their HR role. These standards are attained through rigorous training, development, and educating the Soldiers on how to serve the nation and the constitution as professionals. After nine years of war, which erupted from 9/11 we assess the attributes
Many argue that Special Forces can improve with women in the ranks. Activists protest that women and men are equal. Some officers declare that for women to reach top levels of command, the opportunity to serve in Special Forces is a necessity. Scientifically, there are statistics and studies that reveal that there are some women capable of enduring the stresses and endurance required of Special Forces soldiers. I agree that women should hold positions in Special Operations Forces (SOF) and can augment certain missions, but I do not believe women should be included as CMF-18 on a Special Forces Operational Detachment – Alpha (SFODA). Many of the arguments and statistics focus on best case scenarios that lack consideration regarding deployments to austere environments with associated health risk, seem to ignore active-duty female experienced-based opinions and disregards studies on physical and mental stress that contradicts the suggestion.
1. The Philippine Military Academy, as a premiere military institution in the Southeast Asia, bears the task of producing quality military officers and efficient leaders for the Philippine government. As such, the recruitment of cadets for the academy is no simple endeavour. Cadet applicants are screened and subjected to several recruitment requirements to determine their suitability for the academy. More often they are referred to as the “cream of the crop.”
 Officers who a selected to participate in the unit should be in good physical condition, and able to pass a physical examination by a physician.
As NCO’s we sometimes become complacent in our positions and our routines. Accepting challenges is what sets us apart and continues to ensure that we grow as Soldiers, Leaders, and Non-Commissioned Officers. The Sergeant Audie Murphy Club induction process is rigorous, and because of the rigorous amount of preparation that it takes to earn it, I will become a more knowledgeable NCO, while also allowing room to realize what my weaknesses are in order to improve in those areas. This learning and self-refining assessment will ultimately help me become a better NCO for my Soldiers. I aspire to become a member of the Sergeant Audie Murphy Club for
I have organized this paper into five distinct sections; mission, task organization, capabilities, limitations, and finally the conclusion. After the reading and comprehension of this paper, you should have gained a basic understanding of the Special Forces (SF) Chemical Reconnaissance Detachments (CRD). The following paper is mixed with Unclassified (UCI) and For Official Use Only (FOUO) information. FOUO is annotated at the beginning of all For Official Use Only information, the rest of the paper is UCI. If you wish to share this information paper with others, please at a minimum; confirm identity of the person prior to providing (FM 380-5, 2000). For further handling instructions please refer to FM 380-5, or contact me, I will gladly answer all questions.
LM01, Ethical Leadership. (2012). Maxwell Gunter AFB. Thomas N. Barnes Center for Enlisted Education (AETC)
Readiness is of the utmost importance with training being the most significant aspect that contributes to Readiness. Each Soldier needs an individual training plan. The plan should take the Soldier from enlistment to discharge or retirement. It is each Soldiers responsibility to be proficient in their field craft. This includes being fit mentally and physically, and trained to win in a complex world. It is the responsibility of the NCO to train these Soldiers. Unit training plans will address the readiness and resilience of individual Soldiers to ensure their fitness to accomplish their mission. Units must conduct realistic training at the individual, squad, platoon and company levels focused on Mission Essential Tasks (METs) for their
- - -, dir. “Pararescue.” The Official Website of the united States Air Force. N.p., n.d. Web. 7 Feb. 2012. .
The most difficult barrier to conducting initial individual training is the varying backgrounds of all of the soldiers. In ...
2. Bell, Sandra F., Gabrielle M. Anderson, Herbert I. Dunn, Brian G. Hackett, and Joseph W. Kirschbaum. "Military Education: DOD Needs To Enhance Performance Goals and Improve Oversight of Military Academies." . GAO, Sept. 2003. Web. 13 Feb. 2011. .