ILW Panel: Army Institutional Adaptation Readiness Core Enterprise U.S. Army Forces Command General Hondo Campbell 6 October 2009 As of Oct09

LIMDIS / FOUO / Close-Hold / Pre-Decisional Modified: As of 11 January Version XX Enterprise Task Force Supporting the Army Imperatives IMPERATIVES Sustain Prepare Reset Transform 2009 Current 2011 Future Restore Readiness + Strategic Flexibility Sustain Volunteer Force Current Demands Restore Readiness + Strategic Flexibility Sustain Volunteer Force Current & Future Demands Institutional Adaptation Improve ARFORGEN Adopt an Enterprise Approach Reform Requirements and Resource Processes

Linear Major Contingency Response Force Rapid Regional Response Force Reinforcing Force Strategic Reserve XXX XX III X X The FORSCOM Conventional Force Generation Model (FGM) X XXX XX X X X8 E X X 5 E X E X III X X2 CA EAD/EAC CONUS Sustain Base III PRC PARTIAL FULL Rotational Available Reset Train/Ready Post Army Force Generation (ARFORGEN) AC Unit RC Unit Legend: Institutional Adaptation “From Linear to Rotational Force Generation” Policies, Procedures, Processes ≠ Policies, Procedures, Processes Pre “Tiered Readiness / Sequential Deployment”“Progressive Readiness / Cyclical Deployment” “Create Institutional Efficiency” Maximize Readiness with Available Resources 3

Generating Force Operating Force Institutional Army Supply Modular Trained and Ready Forces COCOM “Just In Time” Demand Validated Requirement JFCOM Joint Staff 4 DA Policy Planning Programming Budgeting Strategy ARFORGEN Governance and Oversight FORSCOM TRADOC AMC IMCOM HRC... OSD AvailableResetTrain/Ready unit returns enters Reset Progressive Unit Readiness ARFORGEN Management and Execution FORSCOM AC / ARNG / USAR Joint Staff “GAPS” ARFORGEN Prioritization and Decisions Army Campaign Plan AR2B SRU ASM SVTC ARFORGEN Today – The Model

Internal Institutional Gaps (and recommended adaptations) Generating Force Title 10 functions are not properly aligned to support the ARFORGEN process  Restructure Generating Force Title 10 functions to align with ARFORGEN by adopting an enterprise approach and aligning Core Enterprises functionally (materiel; human capital; infrastructure and services; and readiness) and enfranchise enterprise “leads” to support the ARFORGEN process (form follows function) Generating Force policies, systems and associated processes, and procedures remain linear and disconnected from the rotational Operating Force  Transform the Generating Force’s policies, systems, and procedures to optimize support of ARFORGEN (from sequential to cyclical force generation; from tiered to progressive readiness; and from a strategic reserve to a fully integrated operational force for the Reserve Component) Current organizational “silos” are functionally optimal, but institutionally sub- optimal; they have not transformed to effectively meet the requirements of an expeditionary and campaign capable Army  Transform the structure and processes of the functional “silos” to optimize integrated support to an Operating Force that is progressively readying and cyclically deploying modular units from across the components (i.e., synchronize outputs with the ARFORGEN process and priorities) 5

CSA’s Intent – Improve ARFORGEN Leverage the RESET ROC Drill as a "forcing function" to adapt the institution and institutionalize ARFORGEN The Army can achieve 1:2 and 1:4 by FY12. Adapt and institutionalize ARFORGEN prior to the first BCT’s deployment in FY12 (October 2011). Each Core Enterprise (CE) must identify the policies, processes, procedures, and strategies within their CE that must be changed Identify associated costs to implement those changes prior to the Program Objective Memorandum (POM) budget submission in early

Improving ARFORGEN Initiatives Submission Timeline Jun 09 – RESET ROC Drill: End to end mapping of each Core Enterprise (CE) lifecycle. Identification of misalignment / friction encumbering the ARFORGEN process Jul to Sep 09 – Identification of the top 5 to 10 issues within each CE lifecycle that need to be fixed to institutionalize ARFORGEN process 28 Sep 09 – CE work group assessment and analysis 29 Sep 09 – CE submission of proposed issues for the fusing session 6 Oct 09 – Fusing session hosted by Readiness Core Core Enterprise (RCE) 13 Oct 09 – ARFORGEN Synchronization Board at Forces Command headquarters 17 Nov 09 – Discussion at the Army Enterprise Board in the Pentagon 1.CEs identify top “five to ten” policies, processes, procedures, and strategies that must change to institutionalize ARFORGEN 2.FY12 BOG:Dwell ratio is 1:2 (AC) and 1:4 (RC) 3.CEs include their recommendations for change and associated costs to implement in budget submission 7

Readiness Core Enterprise Improving ARFORGEN Initiatives Readiness Core Enterprise (RCE) conducted assessment and focused on the following initiatives: Training - collective training responsibilities; training support; and training enablers. Apply enterprise approach principles to collective training Training Support System adaptation Funding flow for Title 10 ARFORGEN functions Intelligence support to collective training FOUNDRY intelligence training program The Total Army Language Program Mobilization and Demobilization Resourcing transition of RC to Operational Reserve Resourcing continuous mobilization Implement mobilization General Office Steering Committee Knowledge Management - integration of numerous initiatives to develop Army Enterprise information architecture 8