Army to match processes to budget reality, says top official

Anticipated cuts compel service to launch reviews of force structure and training processes

The Army will revise its developmental model and make other adjustments to successfully counter adversaries around the globe and adjust to changing fiscal circumstances at home, Army Secretary John M. McHugh said today at the opening session of the AUSA Annual Meeting and Exposition in Washington, D.C.

To respond to threats around the globe, the Army must change its institutions to counter adversaries who are no longer only nation-states, McHugh said. "Our generating force must not only be an engine of change, it must be designed for change," he said.

He observed that large institutions change slowly, but the need for change will be driven by 'harsh realities' such as looming defense budget cuts. In his first year on the job, McHugh said that he has begun a process change how the Army does business, switching to a "smaller, smarter, cheaper, better" model. This process was kicked off with a series of capability portfolio reviews designed to align the service onto a new path. The results of the reviews will be ready this February, he said.

Among the areas under review are the Army's force structure and training processes. McHugh noted that he has also launched a commission to examine Army acquisition processes. However, he added that the Army and other military services have attempted to control fiscal spending in the past. The service requires new efficiencies that are ultimately responsible to the taxpayer. "Institutional change is not merely about pinching pennies and pushing pens," he said.

But people remain the Army's core strength, and any changes must always be balanced to provide services to Army personnel and their families, he said. McHugh closed his address by noting that major institutional change will be a long process that will require leadership from across the service.

Reader comments

Tue, Oct 26, 2010

And why is the Army (and presumably the other services) doing world-wide threat analysis and predictions on their own? Shouldn't this be going on at the Pentagon/State/Itel community/White House level? One of the reasons DoD is always out of money, is that you have multiple groups doing the same things in parallel, instead of as a group effort. The whole description smacks of turf protection and 'that's the way we've always done it'.

Please post your comments here. Comments are moderated, so they may not appear immediately after submitting. We will not post comments that we consider abusive or off-topic.

Please type the letters/numbers you see above