Increased Empowerment Of The American Non-Commissioned Officer - Essay Example

? INCREASED EMPOWERMENT OF THE AMERICAN NON-COMMISSIONED OFFICER A non-commissioned officer, sometimes known as a sub-officer is an officer within the military, who has not been given a commission. Such officers obtain their authority and position through promotion by the enlisted ranks. There are varied classes of non-commissioned officers such as junior non-commissioned officers as well as senior non-commissioned officers. Some people have referred to non-commissioned officers as the backbone of the armed forces (Bland, 2009). This is primarily because they are the most visible leaders for majority of military personnel. In addition to this, they are the leaders principally answerable for the execution of a military organization’s task, as well as training the personnel to be adequately prepared for execution of their mission. Non-commissioned officer’s education and training involves leadership and management incorporated with service-specific and combat training. This paper shall focus on the increased empowerment of the American Non-commissioned officer over time. The paper shall, also discuss the fundamental causes and consequences of the shift in responsibilities of the NCOs down the chain of command. Moreover, the paper shall discuss how well the US military is prepared or not prepared for the ever increasing burdens of responsibility. Finally, I shall give my opinion of whether or not this trend shall continue. For one to understand the ever increasing empowerment of the American Non-commissioned officer, it is essential to review the history behind it. The history of the NCO in the United States can be traced back in 1775 with the dawn of the Continental army. This officer did not copy Britain, but just like the American army, he blended French, Prussian, and British army traditions into a unique American institution (Bland, 2009). The development of change in the organization and action of the military offers an insight into the transfer of ultimate power and responsibilities down the succession of command. As much as the empowerment of the NCO is ever increasing, it is arguable that there is more room for further advancement for the military. There are several factors that have contribute to the increased empowerment of the non-commissioned officer in America, however, this paper shall focus on the three most important; advanced training opportunities, fighting strategies, and military doctrine (Bland, 2009). Advanced training opportunities It has constantly been argued that knowledge is power. This holds true considering the ever increasing empowerment of the American NCO. It is true that technical skills and leadership training are essential for a successful and affective NCO. Before the publicized training manuals for NCO, the only available training was on-the-job training (Fisher, 1994). Professional education was unknown for NCOs except the constant instructions received from company commanders. All leadership skills were practically learned during operations. Today, however, skills in leadership are taught continuously providing proper decision-making for trainees. The training required to make use and maintain complex battle equipment during the First World War initiated the technically advanced field training that paved way for a leadership role. Advanced training was essential for medical services, artillery, as well as other military operation areas. With time, technology grew as wars became more sophisticated. As a result, leadership demands for NCO also grew. General John Pershing recommended that NCO receive a formal training, a suggestion that sparked the NCO academy system in the 1950s (Fisher, 1994). Later, a Non-commissioned officer Candidate Course was created that trained NCOs in combat arms. The NCO’s Educational System put a formal training system that educated both men and women. Fighting strategies Battle history evidences that the constant changes in fighting led to the evolution of the NCO as a leader in the military. In the early days of Colonial America Militia, the NCO served a similar purpose as the European NCO. In the beginning, the launch of NCO empowerment overlapped with an inevitable death through war. However, with the continued tactical changes in war the importance of a NCO leader became more apparent. It is arguable that advances in weaponry directly resulted to changes in linear tactics. The empowerment of the NCO fueled the artillery during the Mexican-American War, the upheaval riffle, and machine guns. Advances in weapons called for a need for more specialized units, which in turn called for leadership demands (Fisher, 1994). Advancements in technology and weapons resulted to increase in battlefield tactics, therefore, increasing the importance of a leader, and the role of NCO. The roles of the NCO have continued to evolve with the argument that coordination and synchronization of the fight is not just to win the battle, but to win the peace. The goals of killing the opponent have, therefore, been replaced with creating and rebuilding humanitarian and democracies for underdeveloped nations. The responsibility of the NCO is not only to be talented in battle, but also to be sensitive and understanding to the changes within the operation. Military Doctrine Historically, the military has, and continues to operate on guidelines of its doctrine. As new lessons are learned, a new doctrine is written, implementing changes for the success of the military. The gradual change within the role of the NCO has been documented in the military doctrine (Fisher, 1994). Empowerment of the NCO through regulations within military regulations advanced with publications by Maj. Gen. Silas Casey and Brig. Gen. Winfield Scott, which replaced necessity of battlefield command training and color sergeant. The effects of both the historic battles and current battles have continued to shape the military doctrine, therefore, enhancing NCO empowerment. Initially, dedicated training for sophisticated weaponry justified higher pay than an NCO. However, this changed after the 1908 Army-wide pay bill was established. This bill acknowledged the worth of NCO corps, providing a means to compete with the private sector for the more qualified personnel. Another doctrine, Landing Operations Manual and Small Wars Manual, added an element of getting input from all armed forces members. Although the monetary value of NCO was changed by bills passed by legislation, separation of ranks was illuminated by the managerial tool. The creation of a system of recognizing occupational specialists have significantly aided in the headway of the entire professional development (Bland, 2009). Moreover, the 1958 Military Pay Bill created two more pay grades for a NCO. With this additional pay, power and leadership continued to gro. With the evolution of wars and expansion of requirements, military doctrine shall continue advancing and empower the NCO. History has shown that the chain of command within the military promotes power at the top, while diminishing power down the ranks. Therefore, the NCO shall continue having limited control irrespective of the appearance of empowerment by virtue of increase in educational training and growth. Although the NCO has been recognized as a leader, the military structure has continuously undermined the significance of development required to completely empower the NCO. Successful solution to problems at the presence of an adaptive enemy calls for leaders within the listed ranks to adapt to increases in roles (Bland, 2009). It is, therefore, arguable that the role of the NCO in the military as trainer and a leader shall evolve and reshape with necessities of war. Fundamental causes and consequences of the shift down the chain of command The fundamental causes and consequences of the shift of NCO corps down the chain are factors such as lack of pay, status, training, and education. This has been a persistent problem since the American Army was born. Though remarkable changes have been made, NCO corps still has a long way to go. Initially, there was a division between officers and NCOs. The officers were from a upper class of society, while the NCOs were persons with limited education and skills (Scales, 2006). To some extent, this is still the case in today’s military. However, some change was experienced with the introduction of the blue book by General George Washington. Though some organization was evident, NCOs were still more of front men. Some NCOs today have the same attitudes since they feel that they do not receive what is just for them. This is because officers receive recognition for work done by NCOs. The shift of providing an increased number of responsibilities to NCOs has continued throughout the years. It was not until the Vietnam war that the NCO’s transformation began, though on a slow pace. A lot has been done, though not to the satisfaction of all NCOs. Civilians, officers, and NCOs are all responsible for the same job. Civilians and officers were allowed to attend educational training, with all of their expenses paid. However, NCOs had to pay for their plane tickets. Equality should be ensured and all officers offered equal opportunities if NCOs are to enjoy their duties. After the above analysis, it is arguable that the US military has prepared its NCOs for the ever increasing burdens of responsibility that have transpired. In the early days, there was lack of standardization of the NCO responsibilities and duties. Later, they were trained and their wellbeing taken care of. This evidences that the military has prepared the corps for the increases in responsibility. Noncommissioned education currently taking place is also an essential step in preparing the NCOs for their duties (Scales, 2006). As a result of the training given, NCOs are getting promoted at a greater pace as compared to the past. The experience and educational training that the NCOs have received form the past is immeasurable. It is arguable that this trend shall continue. In conclusion, the empowerment that the NCO in the American Army has received is irreversible. The entire military force is evolving into a more empowered and decentralized force. This is not only for the NCO corps, but for the junior officers too. The army is getting more education than before. The empowerment of the NCO corps has been a success. It has proven this in any minor or major war over the last thirty years (Scales, 2006). It is arguable that the corps shall continue to evolve as trainers, leaders, and guardians. This is because America has the best education system in the world (Bland, 2009). Several NCOs currently hold the better institutional knowledge than the officers instructing them. Though there have been significant entitlements and improvements, there is still room for improvement. References Bland, D. (2009). Backbone of the army: non-commissioned officers in the future army. East Lansing: the University of Michigan. Fisher, E. (1994). Guardians of the republic: a history of the noncommissioned officer corps of the U.S. Army. New York: Stackpole Books. Scales, R. (2006). Certain Victory: The U.S. Army in the Gulf War History of war. Kansas: Potomac Books, Inc. Read More