DOCSLIB.ORG

HISTORY of the OFFICER EFFICIENCY REPORT SYSTEM UNITED STATES ARMY 1775-1917

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
HISTORY of the OFFICER EFFICIENCY REPORT SYSTEM UNITED STATES ARMY 1775-1917 HISTORY of the OFFICER EFFICIENCY REPORT SYSTEM UNITED STATES ARMY 1775-1917 By MALIN CRAIG, Jr. Colonel.FA DRAFT WOV 24 1953 OFFICE.CHIEF OF MILITARY HISTORY DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY fto HISTORY OF THE 4OCX. OFFICER EFFICIENCY REPORT SYSTEM UNITED STATES AJJMY 1775 - 1917 DRAFT BY MAUN CRAIG, JR . Colonel, Field Artillery Office of the Chief of Military History Department of the Army PREFACE When this study was initiated, it was intended to present a complete history of the efforts to increase the efficiency of the officers of the United States Army. In that respect,, it would go beyond the development of the efficiency report and the evaluation thereof. It was planned that the study would cover the selection of officers, promotions, special as­ signments, physical fitness tests, and, in a negative way, the influence of patronage and political influence. The study was intended primarily for officers of the Department of the Army Qeneral Staff who are respon­ sible for the development of future efficiency report forms and methods and for kindred personnel matters. It was also hoped that this work would provide basic information for military students interested in these sub­ jects in service schools and in civilian institutions. This study was begun in the Special Studies Division, OCMH, by Col. Malin Craig, Jr., who wrote chapters I and II and a rough draft of chap­ ter III before being transferred to another assignment. Miss Lucy IVeidman, who edited and prepared the manuscript for publication, made extensive revisions in chapter III. No attempt, however, was made to do additional research, other than minor checks. This Office feels that the manuscript is of value to staff officers and students even in its present draft form. It is expected that at a future date the project will again be resumed and the study brought up to date. P. M. ROBINETT Brig. Gen., USA-Ret. Washington, D. C. Chief, Special Studies Division August, 1953 iii CONTENTS CHAPTER Page I INTRODUCTION 1 .II EARLY DEVELOPMENTS 1 Revolutionary War 1 The War of 1812 6 The 1815 Reduction of the Army 13 The War With Mexico 25 Thq Civil far 25 Post-Civil War Period 30 Patronage and Influence 35 III THE TRANSITIONAL PERIOD 1 Development of the System, 1890-1917 1 The First Report Forms 1 Reaction in the Field 7 The System in Operation 14­ The 1911 Report Form 22 Modifications of the System 29 The Relative Organization Efficiency Experiment, 1907 34­ Civilian Components 39 Assignments and Promotions 4-2 Appointments 4-8 Physical Fitness Tests 51 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION The foundation of the efficiency evaluation system is the efficiency report. It is important that its function, or mission, be understood and aj-plied by those concerned in designing or using it. Properly, it is an accurate exposition of the capabilities, limitations, and other pertinent characteristics of an officer presented in such a manner as to admit of a fair and impartial contrast with any officer /ri.th whom a comparison may be required, for purposes of competitive selection cr assignment. Too often v/e find the report regarded as a means of educating officers, or rewarding them, of punishing them, or of holding a club over their heads. Such con­ ceptions contribute to tne failure of the whole system. The efficiency report is not a new idea, nor is it peculiar to the United Strtes Army. The German Army has had an efficiency report system of some kind since the 17th century.* Napoleon is said to have v/ritten -«- General der Infanterie Rudolf flofmann, Hist Div, USAREUR, L"3 j'i P-134-, "German Efficiency Report System" (Heidelberg, 1952), ch. I, n.3. Copy in Foreign Studies Br., Special Studies Div., OCL'H. "is he lucky?" in the margins of letter reports covering the qualifica­ tions of generals recommended for the baton of a marshal. Our Navy and Marine Corps, as well as the armies and navies of all modern countries, have independently developed efficiency-reporting systems of one sort or another- iv.any large industrial enterprises have similar systems of keeping track of the abilities and capabilities of their employees. The shortcomings of the report are attributable to the frailties of human nature. Among the foremost obstacles to the perfect efficiency re­ port is the very human characteristic of favoritism. It is almost impos­ sible for a person to produce a completely unprejudiced report of a friend or of a subordinate whom he dislikes. The ingratiating personality has the advantage over the more distant one, whatever their relative capabilities. Another failing is leniency. The reporting officer, having a commendable loyalty toward his subordinates,, errs on the generous side. In time he must raise his carefully considered grades by a factor to bring the subject officer to his rightful relative position among his contem­ poraries. Average officers become excellent and those slightly better are in the superior bracket. The end result is that all but a few hopeless misfits are at the top of the list, and the system is rendered entirely ineffective. In the peacetime army prior to the //ar with Spain, and to a lessening extent in the period preceding ViTorld //ar I, the large proportion of officers were with regiments, or were members of service corps much smaller than today and of much simpler function. The. officer with troops served in the same regiment and with the same fellow officers for years. His duties changed but little over long periods. Ke might be detailed on special assignments, but he was merely detached. Ke remained a member of his organization and returned to it. In his regiment he was among people who knew him from long association and who had no need for written records, •S3 filed many days ' journey away, to help them form their opinions of his accomplishments and his shortcomings. Similarly, the small staff corps consisted of officers who had long served together and who had a reasonably accurate idea of what might be expected of each other. And the interrelations of the line and staff organizations were close enough so that an officer's reputation soon spread throughout the service, small as i t then was. 3y the time an officer had been commissioned for 10 years he probably knew half of the officers of the Army, and his "service reputation" was established and widely known. With the increase of the Army after the Spanish-American far, this condition began to decline. An officer not fortunate enough to be asso­ ciated with future leaders was apt to be overlooked when the great need for able men came in 1917. The efficiency report system, then in use for 27 years, was of considerable value in overcoming this condition, but the long-ingrained conceptions of the service reputation and selection by patronage, together -with the fact that officers still remain in one regi­ ment for very long periods, combined to the decided disadvantage of the able officer unfortunate enough to have served in a regiment whose senior officers were not of a caliber to advance to high command. Prior to Vforld :var I the details and assignments for which officers had to be selected v;ere far more limited than today. They consisted of relatively few staff assignments, details with civilian sctoools and Lili­ tia, engineer river and harbor detail, duty at the Military Academy or on the faculty of a service shool, or attache duty. Before about 1890 the lis t was even narrower, comprising an even smaller number of officers on staff duty. Military Academy service, and a few Engineer Corps officers on rivers and harbors work. Little difficulty was experienced in making the few selections for special assignment in those simple days. Selections for promotions were even less difficult. Officers below the grade of colonel were promoted automatically when their turns came, 'within organi­ zations prior to about 1890 and within branches thereafter. Selections for promotion to the grade of brigadier general and above were usually political matters, influenced in varying degrees by military requirements and personnel. In fact, many officers were, and to a limited extent still are (as in the appointment of cadets to the Military and Naval Academies), political appointees, and for many years any infringement upon their rights such as the present efficiency system would have been exceedingly repugnant to them. Furthermore, the separation of an officer from the service v/as legal only as a result of the sentence of a general court martial, and any conception of discharge for incompetence lay far in the future. Very different is the Army of today. Officers are with organiza­ tions but seldom, ;..nd then for limited periods. So large is the officer corps th-it the individual may be completely lost, unless he has a friend in an influential position. V/ere the old system in effect today, an out­ standing man might go unrecognized for years, or an indifferent one pass undetected for his whole career, and the service would suffer accordingly. "Jhen the Army expanded beyond the point where the officer corps v/as a close-knit group, the efficiency report and the system that goes with it became a requirement. In addition, the multiplicity and complexity of the positions now to be filled by officers of the Army calls for an elaborate system of identification and evaluation unthought of in the easier times. The service reputation is not entirely a thing of the past5 it . still plays some part in the selection of officers for positions of im­ portance and trust, and mil no doubt continue to do so.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Armored Infantry Rifle Company
    POWER AT THE PENTAGON-byPENTAGON4y Jack Raymond NIGHT DROP-The American Airborne Invasion $6.50 of Normandy-by S. 1.L. A. Marshall The engrossing story of one of 'thethe greatest power Preface by Carl Sandburg $6.50 centers thethe world has ever seen-how it came into Hours before dawn on June 6, 1944, thethe American being, and thethe people who make it work. With the 82dB2d and 1101Olst st Airborne Divisions dropped inin Normandy awesome expansion of military power in,in the interests behind Utah Beach. Their mission-to establish a firm of national security during the cold war have come foothold for the invading armies. drastic changes inin the American way of life. Mr. What followed isis one of the great and veritable Raymond says, "in the process we altered some of stories of men at war. Although thethe German defenders our traditionstraditions inin thethe military, in diplomacy, in industry, were spread thin, thethe hedgerow terrain favored them;them; science, education, politics and other aspects of our and the American successes when they eventually did society." We have developed military-civilian action come were bloody,bloody.- sporadic, often accidential. Seldom programs inin he farfar corners of the globe. Basic Western before have Americans at war been so starkly and military strategy depends upon decisions made in candidly described, in both theirtheir cowardice and theirtheir America. Uncle Sam, General Maxwell Taylor has courage. said, has become a world-renowned soldier in spite In these pages thethe reader will meet thethe officers whowho of himself. later went on to become our highest miliary com-com­ DIPLOMAT AMONG WARRIOR5-byWARRI0R-y Robert manders in Korea and after: J.
    [Show full text]
  • The China Relief Expedition Joint Coalition Warfare in China Summer 1900
    07-02574 China Relief Cover.indd 1 11/19/08 12:53:03 PM 07-02574 China Relief Cover.indd 2 11/19/08 12:53:04 PM The China Relief Expedition Joint Coalition Warfare in China Summer 1900 prepared by LTC(R) Robert R. Leonhard, Ph.D. The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory This essay reflects the views of the author alone and does not necessarily imply concurrence by The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory (JHU/APL) or any other organization or agency, public or private. About the Author LTC(R) Robert R. Leonhard, Ph.D., is on the Principal Professional Staff of The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory and a member of the Strategic Assessments Office of the National Security Analysis Department. He retired from a 24-year career in the Army after serving as an infantry officer and war planner and is a veteran of Operation Desert Storm. Dr. Leonhard is the author of The Art of Maneuver: Maneuver-Warfare Theory and AirLand Battle (1991), Fighting by Minutes: Time and the Art of War (1994), The Principles of War for the Informa- tion Age (1998), and The Evolution of Strategy in the Global War on Terrorism (2005), as well as numerous articles and essays on national security issues. Foreign Concessions and Spheres of Influence China, 1900 Introduction The summer of 1900 saw the formation of a perfect storm of conflict over the northern provinces of China. Atop an anachronistic and arrogant national government sat an aged and devious woman—the Empress Dowager Tsu Hsi.
    [Show full text]
  • NPRC) VIP List, 2009
    Description of document: National Archives National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) VIP list, 2009 Requested date: December 2007 Released date: March 2008 Posted date: 04-January-2010 Source of document: National Personnel Records Center Military Personnel Records 9700 Page Avenue St. Louis, MO 63132-5100 Note: NPRC staff has compiled a list of prominent persons whose military records files they hold. They call this their VIP Listing. You can ask for a copy of any of these files simply by submitting a Freedom of Information Act request to the address above. The governmentattic.org web site (“the site”) is noncommercial and free to the public. The site and materials made available on the site, such as this file, are for reference only. The governmentattic.org web site and its principals have made every effort to make this information as complete and as accurate as possible, however, there may be mistakes and omissions, both typographical and in content. The governmentattic.org web site and its principals shall have neither liability nor responsibility to any person or entity with respect to any loss or damage caused, or alleged to have been caused, directly or indirectly, by the information provided on the governmentattic.org web site or in this file. The public records published on the site were obtained from government agencies using proper legal channels. Each document is identified as to the source. Any concerns about the contents of the site should be directed to the agency originating the document in question. GovernmentAttic.org is not responsible for the contents of documents published on the website.
    [Show full text]
  • Fort Niobrara, 1880-1906: Guardian of the Rosebud Sioux
    Nebraska History posts materials online for your personal use. Please remember that the contents of Nebraska History are copyrighted by the Nebraska State Historical Society (except for materials credited to other institutions). The NSHS retains its copyrights even to materials it posts on the web. For permission to re-use materials or for photo ordering information, please see: http://www.nebraskahistory.org/magazine/permission.htm Nebraska State Historical Society members receive four issues of Nebraska History and four issues of Nebraska History News annually. For membership information, see: http://nebraskahistory.org/admin/members/index.htm Article Title: Fort Niobrara, 1880-1906: Guardian of the Rosebud Sioux Full Citation: Thomas R Buecker, "Fort Niobrara, 1880-1906: Guardian of the Rosebud Sioux," Nebraska History 65 (1984): 301-325. URL of article: http://www.nebraskahistory.org/publish/publicat/history/full-text/NH1984FtNiobrara.pdf Date: 1/16/2013 Article Summary: Fort Niobrara was built in 1880 southeast of the Rosebud Agency in Nebraska, one of 10 Army posts built in the heart of what was Indian country. The fort was built as one of two large posts near the Brule Sioux and the more defiant Oglala. Cataloging Information: Names: Spotted Tail, General William Sherman, General George Crook, Major John J Upham, George Jewett, J M Tacher, Castigan (soldier), Crow Dog, Samuel Cherry, General August V Kautz, Frederick Benteen, Lieutenant Colonel James Brisbin, Private Hoolohan, Jerry White, Mattie Anderson, Sergeant Nolan, Lieutenant
    [Show full text]
  • 0 George W. Goethals: Life and Reform in the U.S. Army, 1876
    GEORGE W. GOETHALS: LIFE AND REFORM IN THE U.S. ARMY, 1876-1919 Rory M. McGovern A dissertation submitted to the faculty of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of History in the Graduate School. Chapel Hill 2017 Approved by: Joseph T. Glatthaar John C. Chasteen Wayne E. Lee Michael C. Morgan Benjamin Waterhouse 0 © 2017 Rory M. McGovern ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii ABSTRACT Rory M. McGovern: George W. Goethals: Life and Change in the U.S. Army, 1876-1919 (Under the direction of Joseph T. Glatthaar) In the culminating achievements of a lengthy career in the U.S. Army, George W. Goethals led the construction of the Panama Canal and managed the effort to sustain an army of approximately four million soldiers during the final year of the First World War. At the outset of that career, neither he nor the U.S. Army was prepared to meet such challenges. Using biography as a vehicle to examine a larger problem, this dissertation follows Goethals’s career in order to understand the nature of change in the U.S. Army during the late-nineteenth and early- twentieth centuries as it transitioned from a frontier constabulary and coastal defense force to a modern army capable of projecting power abroad and meeting the challenges of twentieth- century warfare. Goethals’s story reveals that the legacy of the Civil War and the army’s failure to keep pace with changing social norms and practices in training, education, and perceptions of professionalism created a traditionalist culture that did not embrace the new structures imposed by the Root Reforms at the turn of the century, but sought to apply them to comfortably traditional norms, values, and practices.
    [Show full text]
  • Civil-Military Relations and the Dynamics of American Military Expansion
    ASPJ Africa & Francophonie - 4th Quarter 2016 Civil-Military Relations and the Dynamics of American Military Expansion JEFFREY W. MEISER, PHD* t is the era of the political general.1 Our combatant commanders “own the battlespace” and have extraordinary influence on the resources that flow into their theater of operations. They seem just as comfortable brief- ing the public at high-profile think tank events and writing Washington Post op-eds as they are leading their troops in battle.2 The important resources for these modern-day warriors include their “Capitol Hill contacts and web of I 3 e-mail relationships throughout Washington’s journalism establishment.” Savvy American presidents give these men the time and resources they need and in return expect them to “prop up” administration policies.4 Their relation- ships with American presidents are the stuff of front-page headlines, as are their ethical failings and lapses in judgment.5 These commanders have also been strong advocates of expanding and intensifying combat missions by lengthening the US commitment, increasing the number of troops, and engag- ing in armed state-building.6 In sum, military commanders in-theater have a strong influence on military strategy, and they appear to use that influence to escalate, expand, and prolong America’s recent wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. This trend is potentially problematic in a time when many prominent strate- gists are calling for restraint.7 The characterization of the modern general outlined above is based on a very small sample of general officers, mainly Gen David Petraeus and Gen Stanley McChrystal. Do these two generals exemplify a trend in civil-military (civ-mil) relations, or are they outliers? More generally, are military officers on the ground *The author is an assistant professor at the University of Portland.
    [Show full text]
  • Spearhead: Armored Forces in Normandy
    Spearhead: Armored Forces in Normandy M4 Sherman tank crew at Fort Knox, Kentucky, 1942. Courtesy of The Atlantic. Michael Kern Program Assistant, National History Day 1 “Rapidity is the essence of war; take advantage of the enemy’s unreadiness, make your way by unexpected routes, and attack unguarded spots.” - Sun Tzu, The Art of War 2 What is National History Day? National History Day is a non-profit organization which promotes history education for secondary and elementary education students. The program has grown into a national program since its humble beginnings in Cleveland, Ohio in 1974. Today over half a million students participate in National History Day each year, encouraged by thousands of dedicated teachers. Students select a historical topic related to a theme chosen each year. They conduct primary and secondary research on their chosen topic through libraries, archives, museums, historic sites, and interviews. Students analyze and interpret their sources before presenting their work in original papers, exhibits, documentaries, websites, or performances. Students enter their projects in contests held each spring at the local, state, and national level where they are evaluated by professional historians and educators. The program culminates in the Kenneth E. Behring National Contest, held on the campus of the University of Maryland at College Park each June. In addition to discovering the wonderful world of the past, students learn valuable skills which are critical to future success, regardless of a student’s future field: • Critical thinking and problem solving skills • Research and reading skills • Oral and written communication and presentation skills • Self-esteem and confidence • A sense of responsibility for and involvement in the democratic process Participation in the National History Day contest leads to success in school and success after graduation.
    [Show full text]
  • Protecting the Mission
    © COPYRIGHT by Joshua S. Jones 2013 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED Dedicated to my family. PROTECTING THE MISSION: THE CASE OF THE U.S. ARMY BY Joshua S. Jones ABSTRACT In the literature of organizational change, scholars generally agree that organizations resist change, a phenomenon usually described as organizational inertia. Most of this literature, however, ignores the question of how such resistance to change is manifest. I seek to fill this gap by explaining the tactics that organizations use to resist change. Most of the literature on organizational change also treats resistance as a byproduct of organizational nature. In contrast, I start from the presumption that resistance can be an intentional act and not solely a passive characteristic or byproduct of organizations. In seeking to understand resistance as an intentional act, I explore the following questions: How does an organization resist the external and internal forces for change that act upon it? Are there similarities and differences to this resistance depending on whether the force is internal or external? Are organizations more or less successful in resisting internal or external forces for change? Over time, do organizations become more skilled at resisting? To answer these questions, I use the case study approach to look at the U.S. Army and its response to challenges to its sense of mission, something the literature predicts the Army should resist. More specifically, I test these hypotheses: 1) organizations employ different types of tactics of resistance depending on whether the force for change is internal or external; 2) organizations are more successful at resisting internal than external forces for change; and 3) organizations become more effective at resisting over time.
    [Show full text]
  • Boxer Rebellion Character List
    ODUMUNC 2017 Issue Brief Historical Crisis The Boxer Rebellion, 1899-1901 by Omar Diaz Bahena Old Dominion University Model United Nations Boxer Rebellion Character list Allied leaders has also won him a sizeable personal fortune. Sir Robert Hart Colonel Adna Chaffee 1. Sir Robert Hart, Inspector-General of (later in his career) the Chinese Maritime Customs Service. Having served the Chinese 2. Adna Chaffee, Colonel, Commander government for decades, Sir Hart has of US Forces. Colonel Chaffee has developed a soft spot for China and its been in the army for almost 40 years, people, and does not want to see the and has served in the Civil War, Indian country permanently divided. For years Wars, Spanish American War, Hart worked for the Chinese Philippine Revolt, and now Boxer government running their customhouse Rebellion. Having been in so many where he increased the government campaigns his military record is very revenue from trade while also improving distinguished, although his rank is far western access to interior China. junior to other allied commanders. Through his many years of travel and Colonel Chaffee’s first concern is the working in the country Hart has intimate safety of foreign diplomats and families knowledge of China and its government. trapped in the Legation Quarter. He is His well-known respect for China has also under orders from U.S. President won him many valuable connections McKinley to push the other powers to throughout the country, especially with adopt his “Open Door Policy” on China. the China’s chief diplomat Prince Qing. Chaffee has just arrived in China from His years of business and Chinese trade Cuba, and will need to draw on US troops and supplies from nearby US 1 The Boxer Rebellion, 1899-1901 positions in the Pacific like the governorship over the island until the Philippines if the US is to play a major crisis is over.
    [Show full text]
  • Army Base Historic Names
    Army Base Historic Names Gen. Mark Milley The secret history of Confederate post names the Army never wanted you to see Nearly two hours into a Congressional hearing on the military’s role in the June crackdown on protesters in Washington’s Lafayette Square, Rep. Anthony Brown (D-Md.) was focused on something else: Why does the U.S. Army still have 10 bases named after officers who fought for the Confederacy in the Civil War? “Gen. Milley, I know that you are a student of history,” Brown, a retired Army colonel who had served in Iraq, said on 9 JUL to Mark A. Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. “Can you comment on the naming of Army installations after Confederate soldiers? Does it reflect the values that we instill in soldiers? Are these Confederate officers held up as role models in today’s military? Does it help or hurt the morale or unit cohesion of service members, particularly that of the Black and Brown service members who live and serve on these installations today?” Milley, the gruff 62-year-old senior military advisor to the president, looked down at his hands. “Congressman, we’ve had a lot of discussion in the Department of Defense and the Joint Chiefs on that very topic,” he said, fidgeting with some papers in front of him. “I’ll give you a couple of things to think about.” Army officials had argued for years against changing the names of its posts, insisting that officers who had fought against the United States during the Civil War had a “significant,” if painful place in its history.
    [Show full text]
  • The American Military Government in the Philippine-American War, 1899-1902
    W&M ScholarWorks Undergraduate Honors Theses Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects 5-2015 Foundations of Empire: The American Military Government in the Philippine-American War, 1899-1902 Luke Frerichs College of William and Mary Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/honorstheses Part of the Legal Commons, Military History Commons, and the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Frerichs, Luke, "Foundations of Empire: The American Military Government in the Philippine-American War, 1899-1902" (2015). Undergraduate Honors Theses. Paper 884. https://scholarworks.wm.edu/honorstheses/884 This Honors Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects at W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Undergraduate Honors Theses by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Frerichs 1 The United States in the Philippines The Philippine Islands were the scene of the United States’ lengthiest colonial undertaking. In June 1898, American soldiers under the overall command of Major General Wesley Merritt disembarked in the jungles around the archipelago’s colonial capital of Manila. The soldiers, the majority of whom were National Guardsmen, were ostensibly there to support local Filipino rebels in their war with Spain. The American naval and military expeditions to the islands intended to seize Manila to use as leverage against the Spanish in the pending peace negotiations that would end the Spanish-American War.1 However, instead of a temporary occupation, the American landings marked the beginning of United States rule in the Philippines. In August 1898, the Americans surprised their erstwhile allies against Spain by unilaterally occupying Manila.
    [Show full text]
  • 2016 Reprint, with Minor Changes
    2016 Reprint, with Minor Changes IMCEN Books Available Electronically, as of September 2001 (Before the 9/11 Terrorist Attacks on New York and the Pentagon, September 11, 2001) The Chiefs of Staff, United States Army: On Leadership and The Profession of Arms (2000). Thoughts on many aspects of the Army from the Chiefs of Staff from 1979–1999: General Edward C. Meyer, 1979–1983; General John A. Wickham, 1983–1987; General Carl E. Vuono, 1987–1991; General Gordon R. Sullivan, 1991–1995; and General Dennis J. Reimer, 1995–1999. Subjects include leadership, training, combat, the Army, junior officers, noncommissioned officers, and more. Material is primarily from each CSA’s Collected Works, a compilation of the Chief of Staff’s written and spoken words including major addresses to military and civilian audiences, articles, letters, Congressional testimony, and edited White Papers. [This book also includes the 1995 IMCEN books General John A. Wickham, Jr.: On Leadership and The Profession of Arms, and General Edward C. Meyer: Quotations for Today’s Army.] Useful to all members of the Total Army for professional development, understanding the Army, and for inspiration. 120 pages. The Sergeants Major of the Army: On Leadership and The Profession of Arms (1996, 1998). Thoughts from the first ten Sergeants Major of the Army from 1966–1996. Subjects include leadership, training, combat, the Army, junior officers, noncommissioned officers, and more. Useful to all officers and NCOs for professional development, understanding the Army, and for inspiration. Note: This book was also printed in 1996 by the AUSA Institute of Land Warfare. 46 pages.
    [Show full text]