Like many other U.S. Army leaders, for as long as I’ve been a soldier, the Army profession has been my guidepost. Before I was even fully aware of what it meant to be a professional, the “sound craftsmen” I looked up to—those who pursue work for its own value and who I aspired to emulate—inspired me to act in accordance with their norms. No doubt many others have had similar experiences.
For the most part, the Army profession isn’t something we think about; it simply is. It shapes our behavior not through directives, but by generating a culture of warfighting excellence within which soldiers and leaders operate. We all must remember that “the profession” isn’t some external entity; it is us. We owe the men and women who volunteer to join us, and the families and communities that support them, professional behavior at all times.
Our profession remains strong. It remains the foundation of all our strength. It defines us, gives us purpose and unity, makes us who we are—the greatest land force on the planet. However, that doesn’t mean we can be idle. Just as a garden must be tended or it will wither, we must tend to our profession to retain its strength.
Maintaining the Army profession requires an understanding of the conditions within which the profession operates. We exist to defend the nation’s interests from external threats, but we also exist as a part of broader American society. We must consider the whole operational environment—both the shifting battlefield and changing domestic environment—to determine how to best evolve our profession.
Global threats are evolving, and the Army profession must adapt to respond. America’s allies and partners are under siege around the globe. Acute and persistent foreign threats continue to disrupt economic, political and military systems. A rising peer threat in the Pacific, and other places around the world, is forcing us to have the overmatch we need across all domains. I am confident we will meet the challenge.
Changing Society
Our profession must build and maintain “a global force that fights when called upon at the scale required,” as senior Army leaders outlined last October in a message to the force, but we must remember that the Army profession is a part of—not separate from—broader American society. Changes occurring across the nation also are changing us; we must understand the impact.
Changing societal values and norms are altering the expectations and values of American society. Young people thinking of serving, even some currently serving, have different expectations and views that are sometimes at odds with the way the military operates. Changes in the labor market generate preferences (for example, telework or remote work) that the nature of the Army profession does not allow us to respond to. None of this is necessarily generational—younger generations are different, but so are we.
The Army profession is rooted in American society, and its purpose is to shield that society from a dangerous world. As the domestic and international environment changes, the Army profession must adapt its systems and processes accordingly.
Defining the Institution
As discussed above, the Army profession is an identity, but it is also an institution consisting of individuals. It consists of two heavily connected components—the profession and the professional it produces—and the interaction between these parts defines its parameters.
The Army profession is, at its core, an organization that executes legitimate use of force on behalf of the nation. We are empowered by the nation to conduct operations on its behalf due to our collective, specialized expertise and self-policing accountability to a set of common norms, laws and regulations under a set of responsibilities to our soldiers, families, civilian leadership and society at large. We build warfighting expertise by observing modern battlefields, conducting continuous and robust assessment of the operational environment, and conducting doctrinal and standards-based training.
We hold ourselves accountable through peer and self-policing, careerlong assessment and mentorship, as well as systems of promotion, selection and, where necessary, eliminations. The systems that generate expertise, enforce accountability and demonstrate commitment to responsibilities are what make the Army a profession and grants us the relative autonomy with which we operate.
Building Competence
These systems produce and continuously develop individual professionals who demonstrate character, competence and commitment. Professionals of character act in accordance with the norms of their profession, not only behaving within legal and ethical requirements, but also meeting Army standards and maintaining discipline.
Professionals build competence through active participation in tough and realistic training, taking full advantage of institutional training and education opportunities, and filling any identified gaps through deliberate self-development. Ultimately,
professionals demonstrate their commitment through dedication to their mission, their unit and their own development.
We are comfortable talking about the professional individual when we talk about the Army profession because we relate to them—they are us. We remember our years of development, all the experiences that brought us where we are. We owe it to our professionals to provide them with the training and tools to improve their warfighting competence at every echelon, codified expectations—modeled by their superiors—to drive their behavior and demonstrated commitment to our responsibilities to earn the commitment we expect them to give us.
Improving Expertise
The Army is working on numerous initiatives to strengthen both the profession and the professional. The Harding Project, which aims to renew the Army’s system of professional journals, is improving the profession’s expertise by revitalizing professional discourse through investment in branch magazines. The new edition of our “blue book” guide for initial-entry soldiers clearly codifies expectations for the Army’s most junior professionals.
U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command’s foundational skills initiative demonstrates commitment to our collective responsibilities by streamlining and synchronizing career-long training that soldiers need to be lethal warfighters of character. The U.S. Army Center for Initial Military Training, in partnership with the U.S. Army Center of Military History, is building the collective understanding of Army history and identity through the Heritage Trail initiative at Fort Jackson, South Carolina.
These initiatives, among others, are indicative of the Army profession’s dedication to steward itself, but they are not enough.
We each own part of the Army profession, and we each must commit to its improvement. Every professional must first hold themselves accountable to the expectations of the profession, going far beyond physical fitness and haircuts to things like continuous self-development, ethical living and professional sincerity. We must hold each other accountable through thoughtful feedback and mentorship, accurate evaluation and uniform enforcement of standards.
Lastly, we must each work to improve the systems for which we are responsible, modernizing and transforming them where applicable to ensure that they produce, develop and support professionals of character, competence and commitment. These responsibilities vary by grade and echelon—the commander of Training and Doctrine Command has different requirements than a team leader—but we can only maintain the Army profession if we all do our part.
I’ll end where I began. The Army profession is strong. Together, we—soldiers, NCOs, warrant officers, officers and Army civilian professionals, in service and retired, from all components—will keep it that way.
***
Gen. Gary Brito is the 18th commanding general of U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command, Joint Base Langley-Eustis, Virginia. Previously, he served as the Army’s deputy chief of staff for personnel. He has served in a variety of command and staff assignments, including deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan, and several assignments within TRADOC.