Military Review English Edition March-April 2016 | Page 120

strategic perspective, and to understand the scope
and the context of landpower’s role in national security are but a few of the developmental needs that
our Army requires of its civilian cohort—these skills
are not readily available in the public marketplace.
Even though each civilian will still have functional
and technical performance requirements that may
be publicly attainable, these skills are far less valuable than expert landpower knowledge, commitment
to the point of sacrifice, and character that guides
professional stewardship of our corporate responsibilities framed in the context of Army culture and
leading in an environment of perpetual change.
To help illustrate this point, we can contrast the
Army civilian professional with an auto industry
employee. Most auto workers in a given plant on an
assembly line contribute to building a vehicle. They
insert a part, or connect a bolt, or attach a component—
whatever is their task to keep the car or truck moving.
There is no need for commitment. Compliance with
task completion is what the individual is responsible
for as each unit moves by. There is little or no need for
competence in specialized knowledge—the task is either
accomplished or it is not. And, demonstrating character
is not even considered because completing a task is all
that is required. In contrast, it takes a culturally assimilated Army Civilian Corps professional, employing his
or her specialized landpower knowledge competently,
to contribute to the optimal outcomes of a multifaceted problem set, share understanding of the technical
standards of quality, and appreciate the moral obligation
to succeed guided by the ethical aspects of his or her
character, to create a combat system that can operate in
a complex environment—that just happens to be a truck.
The specialized knowledge necessary to have this level
of shared understanding is not something that is readily
available within the public sector.
The driving force of change requires a culture that
is committed to developing leaders who deal with uncertainty. It creates a climate that values and promotes
specialized knowledge of the Army culture and the
tenets of landpower across the breadth of its membership, and it creates an environment where all members
are committed to leading change. The Army’s commitment to developing the Army civilian as a full-fledged
member of the profession is strongly influenced by the
velocity of change. Army Civilian Corps professionals
118

are not hired, they are grown. That investment in
cultural growth develops Army professionals who are
competent, committed teammates of character and
who certify as such.

Conclusion
What does this all mean for the Army Civilian
Corps and its future? We have dialogued about
professional definitions and their utility to the Army
Civilian Corps. We have examined the five aspects of
a profession, the essential characteristics of the Army
Profession, and their application to the Army civilian.
We have even considered the effects of change and
its impact on why the Army civilian is a necessary
member of the profession. But to integrate the Army
Civilian Corps as full-fledged members of the Army
Profession, it is essential to certify those that meet
the criteria. Certifying character, competence, and
commitment are the three requirements to justify
membership in the Army Profession.29 Competence,
as previously discussed includes facets of military
expertise and specialized knowledge that span the
cohorts. There are those tasks within the facets of
military expertise and specialized knowledge that do
not apply universally. This realization should never
be justification for excluding a cohort. As we have
demonstrated, the breadth of knowledge that is the
essence of landpower expertise is the criterion for
professional certification in competence. The Army is
creating certification requirements within its career
programs. There is a required civilian leader development program for Army civilians. And, re ٥͕