Mission Command Training Evaluation of the Effectiveness

¶ … Mission Command Training

EVALUATION OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF MISSION COMMAND TRAINING PROGRAM

MSA 699 Project Report

For the Degree of Master of Science in Administration

(Concentration in General Administration)

The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of the MTCP (Mission Command Training Program). Unlike the traditional training centers that focus on training units on the ground, the MTCP uses stimulation programs to carry out training operations. The decision criteria for the research focuses on the benefits to be derived from the implementation and analysis updated literatures. The updated literature from the Department of Army reveals more benefits that the costs incurred in the operation because MTCP has been able to decline the annual costs incurred in its operations.

The study collects data using quantitative technique to validate the data collected through secondary sources. The data are collected from MTCP budget and logistics department and the financial data of the MTCP are collected to evaluate the effectiveness of the MTCP.

Additionally, the study develops hypothesis using the 7-Step hypothesis testing. The 7-step hypothesis testing is as follow:

Step 1: Description of the population characteristics of which hypotheses are to be tested,

Step 2: Declaring the Alternative and Null Hypotheses,

Step 3: Choosing a numerical value for Type I error,

Step 4: Determining the Test Statistic,

Step 5: Determining the Significance Point

Step 6: Obtaining the data, and apply test statistic,

Step 7: Decide to reject or accept the Null Hypothesis.

The results of the regression analysis make the study to accept the null hypothesis and reject the alternative hypothesis. The study accepts the null hypothesis because MTCP delivers the yearly cost benefits for the Department of Army. There is a general cost reduction for the operation and the benefits derived are greater than the costs of operations.

Despite the costs benefits derived from MTCP, there is still a criticism centered against MTCP operations on the ground that the soldiers trained at the ground training centers might be more effective that the soldiers trained with simulation programs. The study suggests that there is a need to implement a higher level of fidelity with regard to operations execution for MTCP.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMMARY i

LIST OF FIGURES ii

CHAPTER I: 1

Introduction & #8230;..1

Problem Statement & #8230;..3

Purpose of the Research 3

Importance of the Program Evaluation 8

Decision Criteria 8

Summary List of Assumptions 12

Summary List of Limitations 12

CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW 13

The Effectiveness of MCTP 14

War Fighter Exercise & #8230;.15

Full Spectrum Exercise 16

CHAPTER III: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY & #8230;..

Introduction 18

Procedures for Data Collection and Scope & #8230;.18

Cost Benefit Analysis & #8230;18

Benefits from WFX to FSX & #8230;.

7x steps hypothesis testing method 20

Chapter IV: DATA ANALYSIS 26

Costs & #8230;27

Benefits 28

Chapter V: SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Chapter Summary 33

Conclusion and Recommendations & #8230;.33

Future Research and Study Contribution 34

REFERENCES 36

APPENDICES 37

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Personnel Tempo 3

Figure 2: Warfighter Exercise Model 12

Figure 3: Full Spectrum Exercise Model 13

Figure 4: Comparison of FY14-18 and FY 15-19 29

LIST OF TABLE

Table 1: Decision Making Process & #8230;..… 4-5

Table 2: MTCP Projected Financial Data for FY14-18 / FY15-19 & #8230;.. 20-23

Table 3: Comparison of Quantitative and Qualitative Research 25-26

Table 4: Summary of FY14-18 and FY15-19 30

Table 5: Descriptive Statistics 30

Table 6: Summary Output of Regression Analysis 31

CHAPTER I: DEFINITION OF THE PROBLEM

Introduction

The over-arching theme of this research project was a program evaluation of the effectiveness of the Mission Command Training Program (MCTP) and the use of simulations in support of contingency operations. The Mission Command Training Program is the Army's capstone Combat Training Center (CTC). MCTP assists units in developing processes and building teams to plan and conduct operations in theater or combat operations.

As the Army's capstone Combat Training Center (CTC), the mission of the MCTP is to support realistic, stressful training for Army Forces (ARFOR) and assist the Chief of Staff of the Army (CSA) in fulfilling his obligation to provide trained and ready units to win decisively on the modern battlefield and to conduct contingency operations worldwide. As stated in Training and Doctrine Regulation 350-50-3, the MCTP provides command and staff training for brigade, division, and corps commanders; their staffs; major subordinate commanders (MSC); and supporting special operations forces (SOF) using simulation centers worldwide. It provides the framework to conduct command and control training from brigade to Joint Task Force (JTF)-level operations. (Battle Command Training Program Publication. 2008)

. MCTP provides a "free-thinking" opposing force (OPFOR), certified observer controllers/trainers, and senior observers as mentors and coaches. Freethinking is defined as able to operate without any restraints imposed by the unit or any other external organizations and/or agents (Army Field Manual FM 7-100-65, 2006)

The effectiveness of MCTP was called into question in an exercise that involved V Corp (V Corp is a training unit that several groups within MCTP observed), which is headquartered in Heidelberg, Germany. MCTP personnel observed the V Corps Deep Operations Coordination Center (DOCC) in a War Fighter Exercise immediately prior to the unit's deployment. The leadership agreed that the involvement of the MCTP enhanced the ability of the DOCC to effectively plan deep operations (Army Field Manual FM 3-0. 2008).

. The team also discovered that MCTP and exercise units needed to re-look at the STARTEX agreements (agreements prior to the start of an exercise between MCTP and the training unit) for exercises to ensure that the conditions experienced by the units are realistic. This exercise has served as a catalyst for change (Training and Doctrine Regulation 350-50-3. 2002).