Military Review English Edition November-December 2015 | Page 100

DOD manages some policy decisions but delegates
most to the services. In difficult recruiting environments,
or when trying to grow the enlisted ranks’ numbers for
a specific purpose, DOD modifies policy to ease quality
requirements within the limits of the law. When the
recruiting environment improves or when the force needs
to get smaller, DOD tightens quality standards to slow
or constrain enlistment within fiscal requirements. The
services then shape their enlisted forces with appropriate
training and assignment depending on talent requirements to accomplish their service-specific roles, missions,
and functions.
In the past, when faced with downturns in recruiting, DOD simply adjusted accession policy toward the
legally lowest-quality standards. If those steps proved
insufficient, the Pentagon requested increased funding
for recruiting incentives. Such policies worked well in an
environment of robust personnel interest and availability in the population pool. However, circumstances
have dramatically changed. A deeper examination of
the environment indicates that in 2015 and beyond, no
combination of policy-loosening measures or incentive
increases will solve the longer-term, systemic problems in acquiring talent the military requires because
the talent pool is decreasing while the competition for
recruiting talent from the private sector is increasing due
to perceptions of better benefits and opportunities.8 The

military, and the Army in particular, will be hard pressed
to keep up. The Army does not have the capability to
expand the quality of the talent pool, nor does it have
the resources to sufficiently compete for the remaining
talent by offering competitive incentives.

The Emerging Quantity and Quality
Problem

The challenge for the services today and in the future is how to maintain the balance between quantity
and quality in an era when both appear to be decreasing in the available manpower pool. The traditional
course in a tough recruiting environment has been to
recruit to the minimum DOD policy standards. This
provided the best opportunity to meet the quantity
the services required under the assumption that what
was lacking in quality could be overcome by additional training. It was recognized that such a policy
did put the quality of the force at increased, albeit
what was deemed acceptable, risk. Of the services, the
Army traditionally has been the most challenged in
managing such quantity-quality tension because it is
the largest service.
Today, as its end strength is being drawn down,
the Army is struggling to enlist the level of talent it
needs under current policy management guidance.
Additionally, in a logical but unanticipated turn, the
Army is increasing its quality requirements
for new recruits in order to grow advanced
specialties such as special operations and
cyber forces, among others, that demand
high-quality recruits with the ability to
learn complex skills. By requiring future
soldiers to have enhanced mental and
physical capabilities as well as to “demonstrate strong moral, ethical, and spiritual
beliefs,” the Army is seeking even better
talent from a pool already straining to meet
today’s quality demands.9 While the Army
has yet to define these new capabilities
and develop the tools to assess them, the
Army’s recruiting assumption is clear: to
win in the complex future environment,
(Photo by Jasmine Chopra-Delgadillo, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers)
today’s quality standards are insufficient
Sgt. Koutodjo Ayivi, a prime power production specialist and contracting officer's technical
representative with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ 249th Engineer Battalion, points to
for tomorrow’s Army. Therefore, the Army
electrical equipment 10 August 2013 at the Bagh-E Pol power plant in Kandahar, Afghanfaces
a predicament. To succeed in future
istan. The Army faces stiff competition from colleges, other military services, and civilian
employers for recruits with the potential to learn complex skills like those of Ayivi.
conflicts, it requires higher-quality recruits.
94

November-December 2015  MILITARY REVIEW