Reorganizing the HTS
Posted By Marc on January 24, 2010
A new briefing on how the Human Terrain System has surfaced in a story by John Stanton over at Cryptome (thanks for sending me the note, John!). As any of my students know, I dislike large powerpoint presentations and can spend hours talking about a single slide. This presentation, at 133 slides, is, IMO, somewhat mind numbing. as John notes:
They are audacious and excellent documents whose purpose seems to be to convince command and funding sources that HTS principals have been working since at least 2008 to improve recruiting practices (rigid check of qualifications), training methodologies (going Socratic, modular and phased) and logistics practices (housing, deployment, transport, move to Kansas City).
I must admit, the slide deck left me underwhelmed, most especially since everything listed in it should have been done at the start of the program.
Having got that out of the way (I have been in a somewhat “bitchy” mood recently as a result of other things going on in my life), there appear to be some good things proposed and I will admit that the comments from current HTS employees on slide 4 make me feel guardedly, hmmm, not optimistic but, shall we say, less pessimistic.
Reading through the entire deck (all 133 slides of it), one thing I did not find was how they are planning on building in quality control feedback loops including student communications. The latter, a lack of some type of hassle-free student feedback loop, has been a serious problem for the training program, and one that does not appear to have been solved by their recent internal blog.
A second lack I noted was in the program evaluation area. This deck deals primarily with a curriculum redesign, which is probably needed. Fine, I understand that and appreciate that they are doing it. But the redesign as outlined goes from design to implementation and appears to be curiously lacking in both testing phases and evaluation. This is, IMO, a curious, and troubling, oversight.
One of the mantras of the corporate world is continuous improvement while, in the academic world, we constantly hear about continuous or lifelong learning. I’m certain we can quibble about whether or not any continuous improvement actually takes place in any given institution, but at least lip service is paid to the concept. Indeed, TRADOC, which oversees the HTS, has adopted the concept with their emphasis on “adaptability” in PME. So, why don’t we see it here?
If I were a cynic (which I am about 30% of the time 
), I would point out that the HASC committee investigation of the HTS is due in about 6 weeks or so. Is that “the” reason why this curriculum redevelopment plan has come out right now? No, not “the” reason – I know that there has been a concern about the curriculum for several years now; but it may well be “a” reason for why this plan is circulating at the moment.
JWC on 
Daniel Gallant on 
MM on 
Mr. Xyz on 
Marc on
The slide deck you are referring to was internal and not meant for outside of the program- that is clear. That said, it provides the public with only a small portion of information about the HTS program. The slides outline a curriculum redesign, which as it states, is what is to begin on the 25th- so doesn’t it stand to reason that checks and balances will be done during that “OPT”? Everything about the HTS program is adaptable and includes required “AARs”- after action reviews by the students once they return from their deployments; so just because it is not listed in this slide deck does not mean it does not happen. That can be said for a lot of the criticisms about HTS.
However, feel free to harken to Mr. Stanton, tell him he did a good job and congratulate his mole. What he managed to do was create a security issue and violated the privacy of a large group of people who are trying to do their jobs. I would remind you and him that HTS is a government agency and the Privacy Act does protect individuals from what Mr. Stanton has done. However, he and others, like yourself, feel that it is appropriate to not only look the document over, but offer your opinions on something you do not fully understand. That is disheartening to me. I truly believed that the colleagues in my profession were better than that and would see through the “indy-media” blogs of a man who would have no attention if it weren’t for these security breaches. I sincerely hope that someone in HTS sues him, or that HTS itself file the papers.
My final comment for you to think on, since many of our colleagues don’t spend the time to do so- is that the HTS program was and remains a conceptual program and with each new brigade that goes downrange they are told to field a new team. The requirement from 5 or so teams to 26 in less than a year excluded the ability to do everything correctly all at once. There is no other program like HTS, nor has there been, so there is no pattern for which to base growth upon. There are and were bound to be problems, but when an organization is told/ordered to do something extraordinary in a limited time and not only met the challenge but ran to it willingly- they should be given applause for the effort, not attacked as this program has been since day one.
RPA- who subsequently, has served their country and has exhaustively researched HTS
Marc,
Thanks for paying attention and for your views. Analysis from outside the Army is exactly what we here at TRADOC need to help drive more useful and grounded change. Such outside scrutiny allows us to see ourselves and our initiatives in ways that improve the process.
Major Bill Jakola
Hi Minao,
I would certainly assume that some checks and balances would be conducted by the Operational Planning Team, but that is not the same as a continuous quality cycle. AAR’s are definitely part of it, but there are other areas that could, and should, be incorporated. For example, the HTT embedded with the 1st BCT of the 1st Cavalry Division last year seems to have done quite well, while others, such as one in Kabul, appear to be doing nothing. Why did one work well and the other do nothing? Are there AARs from the BCT staff? Etc., etc., etc.
And what security issue did he create? Letting people know that the HTS training system was being redesigned? Anyone with two neurons to rub together already knew that a redesign was pretty much mandatory. As to how John got the deck, you would have to ask him. I will also note that there is a significant semantic difference between a “mole” and a program that leaks like a sieve. the first implies an intent to penetrate and subvert program security on the part of an external agency (which is what you are accusing John of by implication), while the second a program that can not generate enough loyalty or effective communications channels to meet what some of its members feel are intolerable conditions.
If a document is brought into the public domain, which this has been, then commenting on it by people who have an interest and concern with the area is both appropriate and to be expected. And, as a point, the HTS is not a “government agency”, it is a government program, a point that you note later, and that of a foreign government, from my position, to boot.
I am very well aware that the HTS is a conceptual program, and that it has had growing pains. I never expected that they would be able “to do everything correctly” in such a short time span. Let me take up your final point, however, about similar programs where, BTW, you are incorrect. First, the HTS is, to some degree, based on the CORDS program from Vietnam, so certain specific organizational lessons are available from that. Second, the US Army has run the FAO program for a number of years now, and that program also had lessons that could be incorporated. The concept of using ethnographic knowledge in a political-military context is not, by any stretch of the imagination, “new” and it goes back, in more or less formalized, if varied, ways for almost 2000 years (no, that is not a mistype – two thousand years). I know this, Montgomery McFate knows this, and pretty much everyone who has studied the history of ethnography (or taken classics) knows this.
The precedents for a variety of ways to construct the program are available and, IMO, are not really the issue at hand here. What I see as the issues are not proving the concept at a conceptual level but, rather, at an organizational and inter-organizational level, especially given the disparity of effectiveness of the teams. Crucial to solving many of these issues is how the HTS is integrated into TRADOC and, in particular, how expectations of how the HTTs are structured as part of the training for BCT command and staff.
Hi Bill,
Thanks for this
. After being accused of subversion, treason and generally ill-informed bitchyness in the last comment, it’s nice to know that some people don’t think I am the well-spring of all evil .
On a more serious note, and we have talked about this in the past, there are some key areas that I really think should be integrated into this type of a curriculum redesign if they are doing it anyway. I am specifically thinking of, hmmm, let’s call them “cross-training”, opportunities. If you go through the deck, you will notice that there are three embed practicums. It might well be in TRADOCs interest to consider a mirror image with BCT staffs and commanders going through similar embeds in reverse (i.e. with the HTS). One of the key differentiators in program effectiveness appears to be the BCT commander knowing what to do with an HTT, so the more that can be brought into the training cycle, the more effective the program will be in the field.
Cheers,
Marc
Marc–
I did not know HTS was a government agency as Minao states.
Perhaps that’s the mindset?
Maybe next step?
Hi John,
As far as I know, it isn’t a government agency – it is a conceptual program operating under TRADOC. From my (limited) understanding of how conceptual programs operate in the US government, they have a fair amount of leeway initially, and that may lead to a mindset that operates as if it were an agency. Unfortunately, for that attitude at least, there are specific clients for this program, and the program itself has to be integrated. Another impetus towards integration was the shift from contract to GG designation that came about as a result of the status of forces agreement in Iraq and, I suspect, a desire to regularize the funding for the program.
Marc–
Makes sense to me.
–John
Marc–
You forgot CAPS in VIetnam.
I am waiting for the turn to Six Sigma for some help..
Tacitus, Montesquieu, Jefferson would have been excellent at the ethnography angle as I mentioned in a briefing in the UK in 2008.
Anyway, thanks for the insights. And thanks to the Major from TRADOC and Minao.
There have been fourth deaths, two evacs recently back to the USA, and others wounded in this program. That’s too high a price to prove a concept like HTS. Lives are too easily expended in this world by those eager to prove a point.
–John
Hi John,
CAPS – hah, yeah….
On the Six Sigma, I hope they don’t go there; the programs have a touch too much overhead for my taste. The best QC system I’ve heard of was KLM’s that was put in place during the late 1970′s and relied on the enlightened self-interest of the executives. Basically, it used the old Roman engineer idea and required that all executives spend 2 weeks out of every quarter acting in a front line position. It worked, too.
I put together a paper a little over a year ago on the use of ethnographic knowledge in the greco-roman-byzantine military tradition (available here). Tacitus and Pliny the Younger were the key figures (building on Lucretius’ work) for developing a “combat ethnography”. Their stuff was picked up by Montesqieu, and reformulated by Jefferson and Gallatin for the Lewis & Clark expedition and the latter formation of the BAE. There is so much background in this area that, at times, I get very frustrated with people who say “It’s NEW!”.
Marc–
On the Nature of the Universe. I ran into that when really young. Still have my crusty paperback of the title.
I agree with you completely. Americans have well-documented problems with history (understanding it). Our lack of knowledge of that really hurts us. I look forward to reading your paper.
I teach a course on National Security (advanced and at high school level..speakers from warfighting and diplomatic communities come in and speak w/class) and perhaps it will be helpful.
Also, if we are trying to understand the cultural terrain, where is the evolutionary psych/bio and cognitive neuroscience. Then again, 50% of Americans do not believe in Evolution.
–John
Hi John,
I think that de res natura is probably one of the most under appreciated books around – I really like it!
The problem with a loss of history goes well beyond the US unfortunately. I sometimes wonder if there isn’t a conspiracy designed to make and keep people ignorant . Oh, well, we do what we can.
Cheers,
Marc