Is it Time for a Homeland Security Additional Skill Identifier (ASI)?

Written by ADMIN on July 16, 2010 in Joint Chatter - 3 Comments
flag

The Army has an Additional Skill Identifier (ASI) system that enables the personnel system to identify specialty skills for purposes such as assignments or contingencies.  For example, in CGSS there are programs for military history, joint planners, and space activities ASIs.  Does the military actually benefit from these ASIs and if so, would it benefit from a homeland security ASI?  After all, military operations in the homeland come under a number of complex legal constraints, among other considerations, that require specialized knowledge. I offer 3 propositions on ASIs based on conversations I have had over the last several years and I solicit opinions on which is most descriptive or your alternative propositions.

Proposition 1.  ASIs are a valuable tool that allows the military to place the right officer in the right position.  They make commands more effective because the special skills of the officer are put to use right away. ASIs are also an incentive that encourages professional development.

Proposition 2.  ASIs are a method for self-selected career stagnation. The ASI identifies officers who have limited interests or places them in limited career tracks that they cannot escape from. Much like actors who are typecast, career progression stagnates.

Proposition 3.  ASIs are a fantastic idea that is simply ignored by the personnel system.  It matters not whether one has an ASI or not, other criteria are exhausted before ASIs become relevant.  They are simply an administrative black hole that briefs well.

What do you think? Does the Army need a homeland security ASI?

Share

3 Comments on "Is it Time for a Homeland Security Additional Skill Identifier (ASI)?"

  1. gbw2 November 28, 2011 at 2:31 pm ·

    I do not think that a Homeland security ASI is the answer but not due to any of the propositions offered. Homeland security is a mission that is given to a unit or individual much like counterinsurgency or humanitarian support. Homeland security, like other operations, is comprised of multiple tasks and requirements. In this case most of the tasks and requirements are complicated by legal considerations and interagency coordination; however the staff judge advocate is likely the best person to assist a commander in navigating the legal issues. In order to effectively accomplish this mission the Army must be able to assign available units and personnel as the need arises. Simply giving Soldiers an ASI does not guarantee their availability for assignment or their level of proficiency in all the required tasks.

    An additional skill identifier (ASI) is designed to identify a Soldier that has been trained in a specific skill that can be leveraged in an operation. The examples given in the original article, joint planning, military history, and space activities have implications across the spectrum of military operations. Focusing as ASI on a single line of operation, for example homeland security, is far too narrow to justify the cost in time and money. Additionally, depending on when the ASI training was received in relation to actual assignment to a homeland security mission the Soldier may not be fully prepared to execute his/her responsibilities.

    A functional area may be a better way to provide personnel dedicated to homeland security. A functional area allows the Soldier to focus on a single issue for their career. By developing a functional area devoted to homeland security the Army would create a career track that provides training and experience to develop selected Soldiers expertise in the specific homeland security tasks and requirements. A functional area also provides the career progression coverage necessary to these individuals during promotion and selection boards because they are evaluated according to their potential in their specific area of expertise.

    MAJ Whittenburg ILE 29D

  2. ADMIN June 7, 2011 at 9:06 pm ·

    July 26, 2010 8:14 AM Rich Berkebile said:

    Thank you for the insight jrpilloni. Like many things, ASIs appear to be practiced differently in different communities. You make an excellent point that if ASI are not beneficial, then why have any?

  3. ADMIN June 7, 2011 at 9:06 pm ·

    July 16, 2010 3:43 PM jrpilloni said:

    This may sound like a cop out, but I think it may be a combination of all three propositions. As an old 48E, ASI’s meant virtually nothing to me personally. Therefore, my perspective is influenced only by my own anecdotal evidence – talking with others. I’ve heard some officers say that their ASI’s had an absolutely positive impact on their career, enabling them access to rewarding job experiences. Others have told me that branch simply ignored them and assigned them regardless of ASI’s. And then others have told me that because of their ASI, they got roped into a job they did not want and that ultimately hurt their career.

    As an A504 instructor I have had more than a few officers express an interest in a Homeland Security ASI because they thought it could boost their chances of going into the field upon retirement. Not sure if that is a positive or a negative for the Army.

    My personal feeling is that if the ASI can potentially have a positive effect on the Army, then why not grant one? When I think back on the three different perspectives I previously described, I can’t help but think that even the officers who were not pleased at ultimately having to serve in a job requiring their ASI, it may still have been good for the Army. We just need to be honest with students in explaining the potential risks and rewards of obtaining the ASI.

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.