03606cam a2200505 i 4500 311507360 RAND 20200811100920.0 101119s2013 caua b 000 0 eng d 0833080326 (pbk. : alk. paper) 9780833080325 (pbk. : alk. paper) RAND/RR-230-A $27.95 paperback CstmoR CstmoR n-us--- UA25 .R43 2013 Readiness reporting for an adaptive Army / Christopher G. Pernin ... [et al.]. Santa Monica, CA : RAND, 2013. xxiii, 139 pages : color illustrations ; 23 cm text txt rdacontent computer c rdamedia unmediated n rdamedia online resource cr rdacarrier volume nc rdacarrier "RAND Arroyo Center." "The research was conducted within RAND Arroyo Center's Force Development and Technology Program"--Preface. Includes bibliographical references (p. 131-139). Introduction -- Building New Capabilities and Readiness Reporting -- Exploring the Value of the MTOE for Readiness Reporting -- From Readiness to Capabilities: Ready for What? -- Transitioning to the Future and Recommendations -- Appendix A: Literature -- Appendix B: Selected Rapid Capability Organizations -- Appendix C: MTOE Scrubs -- Appendix D: Framework for Considering Root Causes of Assigned Missions. The Army has developed an impressive capacity to adapt to emerging requirements by providing units with new capabilities rapidly and flexibly as units prepare for deployment through the Army Force Generation (ARFORGEN) process. The Army’s ability to report on readiness throughout these adaptations, however, is challenged. The readiness reporting system is largely predicated on a bottom-up, deliberate process with known milestones and predetermined designs to which the Army would build readiness. As those targets are changed, for instance when deploying to a changing operational environment as was seen in Iraq and Afghanistan, the reporting system cannot easily keep up. The key challenge to readiness reporting is that Army units now routinely prepare for assigned missions that sometimes differ in meaningful ways from their designed missions. This study examines the Army’s readiness reporting system in light of the increased adaptiveness demonstrated by Army units in the past decade. In this study we found that while the readiness reporting system still works as originally intended, the current readiness reporting system captures only a portion of the adaptations readily seen in recent years. The study offers recommendations to better reflect these adaptations in the readiness reporting system. Description based on print version record. United States. Army Operational readiness Evaluation. United States. Army Reorganization Evaluation. Pernin, Christopher G., 1973- author. Butler, Dwayne M. author. Constant, Louay. author. Geyer, Lily. author. Long, Duncan. author. Madden, Dan. author. Peters, John E. author. Powers, James D. author. Shurkin, Michael. author. Arroyo Center. Force Development and Technology Program. Rand Corporation. United States. Army. Online Access http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR230.html 599514 599514