Research Product 2005-07 

Select21 Soldier Job Performance 

Measurement Tools 

Human Resources Research Organization 

August 2005 

Selection and Assignment Research Unit 

United States Army Research Institute 

for the Behavioral and Social Sciences 

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. 
U.S. Army Research Institute 

for the Behavioral and Social Sciences 

A Directorate of the Department of the Army 

Deputy Chief of Staff, G1 

Authorized and approved for distribution: 

 

 MICHELLE SAMS ZITA M. SIMUTIS 

 Technical Director Director 

Research accomplished under contract 

for the Department of the Army 

Human Resources Research Organization 

Technical Review by 

Kelly S. Ervin, U.S. Army Research Institute

Trueman R. Tremble, U.S. Army Research Institute 

NOTICES 

DISTRIBUTION: Primary distribution of this Research Product has been made by ARI. 

Please address correspondence concerning distribution of reports to: U.S. Army 

Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Attn: DAPE-ARI-MS, 

2511 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, Virginia 22202-3926. 

FINAL DISPOSITION: This Research Product may be destroyed when it is no longer 

needed. Please do not return it to the U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral 

and Social Sciences. 

NOTE: This Research Product is not to be construed as an official Department of the 

Army position, unless so designated by other authorized documents. 
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE 

1. REPORT DATE (dd-mm-yy)

 August 2005 

2. REPORT TYPE

 Interim 

3. DATES COVERED (from. . . to) 

 September 2002 – February 2005 

5a. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER 

DASW01-03-D-0015/DO #6 

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

Select21 Soldier Job Performance Measurement Tools

5b. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER 

 62785

5c. PROJECT NUMBER 

 A790

6. AUTHOR(S) 

 Human Resources Research Organization 5d. TASK NUMBER 

 257

5e. WORK UNIT NUMBER 

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

Human Resources Research Organization 

66 Canal Center Plaza, Suite 400 

Alexandria, VA 22314

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER 

 

10. MONITOR ACRONYM

 ARI 

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 

 U. S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral & Social 

 Sciences

 2511 Jefferson Davis Highway 

 Arlington, VA 22202-3926 

11. MONITOR REPORT NUMBER 

 Research Product 2005-07 

12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. 

13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 

Dr. Trueman Tremble, Contracting Officer’s Representative

14. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 words): Transformation of the U.S. Army into the Future Force involves changes to

missions, systems, and organizational structures. To realize the full potential of transformation, the Army must have

the means to select and to assign high quality individuals who, as first-term Soldiers, can meet the training and 

operational demands emerging with transformation to the Future Force. 

This report is part of a series of research product reports that provide to potential users information on products 

resulting from a project titled New Predictors for Selecting and Assigning Future Army Soldiers (Select21). The goal 

of Select21 is to (a) develop and validate new performance predictor measures and (b) propose use of the most 

promising measures as a foundation for an entry-level selection and classification system adapted to the demands of 

the 21st century. 

This report describes the tools that will be used to measure the job performance and organizational “fit” of Soldiers 

participating in the Select21 research. Soldiers’ scores on these performance measures will be linked to their scores 

on experimental pre-enlistment tests to determine how well the pre-enlistment tests might forecast future job 

performance.

15. SUBJECT TERMS 

Selection and Classification Futuristic Job/Task Analysis Job/Task Performance Requirement Personnel 

Testing Performance Measurement 

 

16. REPORT

Unclassified 

17. ABSTRACT 

Unclassified 

18. THIS PAGE

Unclassified 

19. LIMITATION OF

ABSTRACT 

Unlimited 

20. NUMBER 

OF PAGES

RESPONSIBLE PERSON 

Ellen Kinzer 

 Technical Publication Specialist 

(703) 602-8047

Standard Form 298 

i
ii 
Research Product 2005-07 

 Select21 Soldier Job Performance 

Measurement Tools 

Human Resources Research Organization 

 

Selection and Assignment Research Unit 

Michael G. Rumsey, Chief 

U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences 

2511 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, Virginia 22202-3926 

August 2005 

Army Project Number Personnel Performance 

622785A790 and Training Technology 

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

 iii 
iv 
Foreword 

The U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) conducts 

research to support Army personnel and training goals. In recognition of the changes emerging 

with the Army’s transformation, ARI developed a research program to identify, describe, and 

address future personnel requirements. This report describes an aspect of an ongoing ARI 

project, called Select21, concerned with future enlisted Soldiers. 

The objective of this project is to provide personnel tests for selecting and assigning 

entry-level Soldiers to future jobs. This report is part of a series of Product Reports summarizing 

interim outcomes of this ongoing project. 

Future job clusters – February 2005 

Future Army-wide Soldier performance requirements – March 2005 

9 Soldier job performance measurement tools – August 2005 

Select21 experimental selection and classification instruments 

Select21 validation results and recommendations 

This report describes the tools that will be used to measure the job performance and 

organizational “fit” of Soldiers participating in the Select21 research. Soldiers’ scores on these 

performance measures will be linked to their scores on experimental pre-enlistment tests to 

determine how well the pre-enlistment tests might forecast future job performance. 

Project Select21 is being conducted with support from the Army G-1, Deputy Chief of 

Staff for Personnel, and from the Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC). ARI has 

briefed these sponsors, as well as representatives of other offices to include the Army Accessions 

Command, Human Resources Command, and the Army G-3, Deputy Chief of Staff for 

Operations. Research sponsors have provided the support and guidance needed for the success of 

the research.

 MICHELLE SAMS 

Technical Director 

v 
vi 
What is Project Select21? 

The U.S. Army has undertaken far-reaching changes to transform the current force into one 

that is more responsive, deployable, agile, versatile, and lethal while being fully survivable and 

sustainable under all conditions. New Predictors for Selecting and Assigning Future Force Soldiers 

(Select21) is an Army research project focused on the personnel system by which the Army selects 

entry-level Soldiers and assigns these Soldiers to jobs. Select21 is designed to help ensure that 

through this system, the Army will acquire new Soldiers with the knowledges, skills, and attributes

(KSAs) needed for performing the types of tasks emerging as part of the transformation. More 

specifically, the objectives of Select21 are to develop measures of these KSAs and to evaluate their 

potential for integration into the Army’s personnel acquisition system. 

Figure 1 shows a shematic overview of the Select21 project. To understand how well the 

experimental selection and classification tests work, we will administer them to a sample of Soldiers

and then measure how well these same Soldiers perform their jobs. Select21 will use a “concurrent 

validation” design. With this design, researchers will administer the experimental tests to a sample of 

Soldiers with 18 to 36 months time in service and, at the same time, assess the Soldiers’ job 

performance by using specially designed indicators, called criterion measures. 

Conduct Army-Wide Job Analysis

Conduct Cluster/MOS-Specific Job Analysis

Develop Experimental

Predictor Measures

Develop Performance

Criterion Measures

Field

Test Measures

Conduct

Concurrent

Criterion-Related

Validation

Develop

Recommendations

Jan 2002 Jan 2003 Jan 2004 Jan 2005

Figure 1. Schematic of the Select21 project plan. 

What is this report about? 

The job performance criterion measures are the subject of this report. The main purpose 

is to acquaint Army readers with the purpose, content, and format of these measures by

presenting descriptions and examples. A brief overview of the development process is also 

included. There are five different criterion measures presented: 

• Job Knowledge Tests (Army-wide and MOS-specific) 

• Criterion Situational Judgment Test (CSJT) 

• Personnel File Form (PFF) 

1 

 
• Job Performance Rating Scales (supervisor and peer ratings; includes both 

Current and Expected Future performance rating scales) 

• Army Life Survey (with versions for current and future Army conditions) 

Job Performance Criterion Measures 

The job performance criterion measures have been finalized in preparation for collecting 

concurrent validation data in FY05. For test security reasons some of the measures cannot be 

released in their entirety. 

The following pages provide descriptions and examples for each of the instruments. 

Following this presentation is a brief description of how the instruments were developed. The 

target population for these measures is Soldiers with 18-36 months service but who have not 

been promoted to grade E5. With one exception, the instruments are completed by the Soldiers in 

the target population; the exception being the Job Performance Rating Scales which are designed 

to be completed by the Soldiers’ supervisors and peers. 

The following are the measures presented: 

• Job Knowledge Tests 

• Criterion Situational Judgment Test (CSJT) 

• Personnel File Form (PFF) 

• Job Performance Rating Scales 

• Army Life Survey 

2 

 
Job Knowledge Tests 

 

To help assess first-term job performance, tests were developed that measure both Armywide and MOS-specific job knowledge. The Select21 job knowledge tests are administered via 

computer using Perception® testing software. This allows for a more realistic presentation of test

problems (e.g., using graphics, illustrations, photographs) than with traditional paper-and-pencil 

multiple-choice tests. Visual presentations also enhance the performance-orientation of the items 

and help to reduce the reading requirements. 

The content of the tests was derived from performance requirements identified through a 

future-oriented job analysis of first-term Soldiers. The test blueprints (i.e., test content 

specifications) reflect the performance requirements that can be captured in a knowledge-based 

test. The Army-wide test mostly covers critical common soldiering tasks (Common Tasks – Skill 

Level 1). Tests were also developed for each of the following MOS: 

• Infantryman (11B) 

• Cavalry Scout (19D) 

• M1 Armor Crewman (19K) 

• Signal Support Systems Specialist (31U/25U) 

• Information Systems Operator/Analyst (74B/25B) 

• Intelligence Analyst (96B) 

Within some MOS there may be variability of job tasks due to assignment and/or 

equipment. Therefore, some test questions are tracked so that a Soldier receives questions 

specific to his/her unit or assignment. 

The Army-wide test has 60 questions and the MOS-specific tests have about 50 questions 

each. The test item formats include a mix of multiple-choice, multiple-response, rank order, and 

drag and drop questions. Three sample multiple-choice questions are shown below. Each uses 

visual information to help describe the question or illustrate the response options. 

Sample: What is the shape of an NBC contamination sign? 

A. Square 

 

B. Triangle 

C. Circle 

D. Pentagon

Sample: Which MOPP level is shown in the figure below?

3 
A. MOPP 1 

B. MOPP 2 

C. MOPP 3 

D. MOPP 4 

Sample: An enemy armor platoon (reduced strength) has established a strong point defense along an avenue of

approach. The enemy commander has arrayed his forces to maximize his current assets to delay or stop an opposing

light infantry company. What is the HVT?

 

A. AT missile 

B. T-72 tank 

C. SA-missile squad

D. Mortar platoon 

4 
Criterion Situational Judgment Test (CSJT) 

The Criterion Situational Judgment Test (CSJT) measures a Soldier’s ability to make 

effective judgments about how to handle problems commonly encountered in their jobs. The 

target population for this test is Soldiers who have been in the Army 18–36 months. Each 

question consists of a description of a problem situation and a list of four alternative actions that 

a Soldier might take in that situation. However, instead of selecting the “correct” action, Soldiers 

rate the effectiveness of each of the choices offered. A sample item, with instructions, is shown 

below. 

Instructions: Your task is to rate the effectiveness of each of these actions using a 1–7 rating 

scale, where 7 is highly effective and 1 is completely ineffective. Imagine that you are in the 

situation; use the scale to indicate how effective or ineffective you believe each action to be. 

Sample Question: You are a member of second squad, First Platoon. You have 

noticed that a member of third squad has begun to let job performance and 

military appearance slip. Once very punctual, this soldier has been late to two 

formations in the last week. What should you do?

a. Tell the soldier that the whole platoon will suffer if he/she doesn't change. 

b. Try to talk to the soldier and see if he/she has a problem that you may be able 

to help with.

c. Tell the soldier's squad leader. 

d. Don't interfere. It's up to this soldier's squad or chain-of-command to take care 

of this. 

. 

The CSJT is designed to measure a Soldier’s judgment in situations typically experienced 

by Soldiers in their initial term. During the development of the test, NCOs described actual 

situations that are experienced by Soldiers in this group. The test development process had several

iterations of writing, editing, pilot testing, and analysis. 

Although the test measures judgment in general, items were written to specifically target 

the following areas identified in the job analysis: 

• Adaptability to Changing Conditions

• Effective Self-Management 

• Exhibiting Effort and Initiative on the Job 

• Relating to and Supporting Peers 

• Teamwork 

A Soldier’s performance on an item might reflect a variety of dimensions related to the 

Soldier’s knowledge, skill, and personality. Thus, only a single overall score is computed.

5 
Personnel File Form (PFF) 

The Personnel File Form (PFF) serves as a self-report on selected job performance 

criterion measures. Parts of the PFF closely parallel the Administrative Points content of the 

Army Semi-Centralized NCO Promotion Point Worksheet (PPW). In comparison to the PPW

however, the PFF gathers more detailed information and covers an expanded number of

performance categories. Scale scores are collected in the following areas:

• Awards, decorations, honors, certificates 

• Memoranda, letters of commendation, achievement 

• Army Physical Fitness Test performance 

• Weapons qualification 

• Flag actions, Article 15s 

• Counseling statements, civilian/military arrests/citations 

• Accelerated advancements 

• Initial entry training (IET) performance 

• Additional skill identifiers (ASI) 

In addition, a composite score that simulates achievement on a 500-point PPW (less Duty 

Performance Evaluation and Board Points) is calculated from the Soldiers’ scale scores. 

Soldiers complete a detailed questionnaire that takes them through each one of the areas 

listed. All of the information requested is a matter of record. However, obtaining it from

Soldiers’ records would be both costly and time consuming. Previous comparative studies have 

shown that Soldier self-reports in these areas are highly accurate; at times, more accurate and upto-date than the actual records. 

6 
Job Performance Rating Scales 

The job performance rating scales are designed to be completed by the supervisors and 

peers of the Soldier being evaluated. Raters make ratings on both a Soldier’s current 

performance and on anticipated performance under conditions that seem likely in 2015. All 

Soldiers are rated on Army-wide scales, both current and future. Additionally, Soldiers in target 

MOS (i.e., 11B, 19D, 19K, 31U/25U, 74B/25B, and 96B) are rated on both current and future 

performance rating scales that are specific to their MOS. 

Current Performance Rating Scales 

The Army-wide current performance scales include ratings for performance on several 

dimensions applicable to all entry-level Soldiers regardless of MOS (e.g., Communication, 

Professionalism and Personal Discipline, Adaptability). MOS-specific scales use the same

format, but the dimensions being rated are specific to the MOS. A sample Army-wide scale is 

shown in Figure 2 below. 

Demonstrates Professionalism and Personal Discipline on the Job 

The extent to which the Soldier exhibits selfless service orientation, exhibits integrity and discipline on the 

job, and follows instructions, rules and regulations 

− Fails to adhere to Army standards 

and values 

− Generally adheres to Army 

standards and values 

− Consistently adheres to Army 

standards and values 

− Is disrespectful toward superiors; 

may ignore or refuse to follow 

orders 

− Follows direct orders with little or 

no complaint and is usually 

respectful to superiors 

− Follows orders willingly; is always 

respectful to superiors 

− Usually displays poor military 

bearing 

− Usually maintains good military 

bearing 

− Consistently maintains excellent 

military bearing 

− Does not put in effort to meet 

team goals, even when given 

encouragement 

− Puts in effort to achieve team 

goals, but may need some 

encouragement 

− Willingly puts in required effort to

ensure team goals are achieved

− Takes part in prohibited activities − Usually resists temptation to take 

part in prohibited activities, but 

might succumb to peer pressure 

− Resists even strong peer pressure 

to take part in prohibited activities

− Exhibits little or no self-control or 

discipline on the job 

− Generally exhibits self-control and 

discipline on the job 

− Exhibits strong self-control and 

discipline on the job 

Below Expectations Meets Expectations Exceeds Expectations

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Figure 2. Sample Army-wide current performance rating scale. 

7 
Future Expected Performance Rating Scales 

Analysis of projected Future Force initiatives identified several important ways in which 

the Army is expected to place new or increased demands on first-term Soldiers. Army-wide 

rating scales that describe each of the following four future conditions have been developed: 

• A learning environment in which Soldiers must take greater responsibility for their own 

training and development. 

• Increased need for disciplined initiative. 

• Changes in the nature and frequency of communications with others. 

• Increased individual pace and intensity of work. 

We have also developed rating scales specific to selected MOS. Before completing these scales, 

raters are given a brief visual and text slide presentation about projected Future Force 

developments. Then the raters read a brief description of each of the relevant future conditions. 

They then rate how well they believe the Soldier would perform in the context described. A 

sample condition and scale is shown in Figure 3 below. 

Future Condition: Increased Individual Pace and Intensity 

Future operations will likely involve new aspects of physical, psychomotor, and mental skills. Future conflicts 

are expected to involve intense and sustained operations that will require physical and mental stamina to

conduct high paced operation over long periods. Individuals must be capable of cycling between periods of

work and rest instantaneously and at unpredictable intervals. Mental sharpness will be important and

individuals will be required to process, sort, and prioritize digital information and data flow without becoming 

overwhelmed, even when fatigued or stressed. Soldiers must be able to recognize and respond to mental 

cues and images (such as icons and graphics) rather than real-life visual or sound stimuli.

Soldiers will undergo rapid transitions in mission types and operational environments. Situational conditions, 

such as rules of engagement, hostile forces, threat intent, and force mission can change daily. Adaptability will

be key. There will be less time for transition and experience learning as Soldiers can go from a peacetime, 

home centered, CONUS environment to full combat activities in a matter of a few days. 

Individual Pace and Intensity 

How effectively would you expect the Soldier to meet these future requirements? 

Not likely to meet the Soldier 

demands described. 

Likely to be generally

successful, but will struggle to 

meet the Soldier demands 

described. 

Likely to successfully meet or 

exceed the Soldier demands 

described. 

LOW MODERATE HIGH

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 

Figure 3. Sample Army-wide future expected performance rating scale. 

8 
Army Life Survey 

The Army Life Survey assesses Soldiers’ attitudes about life in the Army. It was created 

in part because we are unable to examine a major criterion of interest, first-term attrition, in the 

planned concurrent validation. The Army Life Survey consists of 16 scales that measure two 

main categories of attitudes related to attrition and reenlistment decisions. The first category 

includes three scales that measure intentions to remain in the Army, including attrition 

intentions, re-enlistment intentions, and intentions to make the Army a career. The second 

category includes measures of several attitudinal variables that research suggests are related to 

career decisions. These include satisfaction with various aspects of Army life (e.g., supervision, 

pay and benefits, work itself), organizational commitment, perceived fit with MOS and the Army

in general, perceived stress, and attitudes about the core Army values. 

The Army Life Survey consists of 99 items. Respondents rate each item on a 5-point

scale with response anchors appropriate to the item and scale dimension. Below are the 

instructions for the survey and five sample items. Note that the confidentiality of responses is 

stressed. 

Instructions: The following survey includes several questions regarding your attitudes, 

impressions, and thoughts about life in the Army. Please read each set of instructions and 

questions carefully. Be assured that your responses will remain completely confidential, and 

will be used for research purposes only. Your individual responses will not be reported. It is 

important that you respond to each question honestly. 

Sample Items:

1. How satisfied are you with the way your supervisor(s) handle Soldiers in your unit? 

2. How satisfied are you with the amount of challenge in your work?

3. I am proud to tell others that I am in the Army. 

4. I find life as a Soldier to be stressful.

5. How confident are you that you will complete your current term of service?

There is also a version of the Army Life Survey that is future-oriented. This presents brief

descriptions of conditions projected to be characteristic of the Army in the 2015 timeframe. 

Respondents are asked how these conditions might affect their interest in remaining in the Army, 

their satisfaction indicators with the Army under these projected conditions, and other relevant 

job-related attitudes given forecasted developments. 

9 
Job Performance Criterion Measures Development 

The goal of the criterion measures is to cover all possible aspects of “job performance” 

for Soldiers. As a result, multiple measures were developed, each requiring unique development 

procedures and strategies. The development steps included the following major activities. 

 

Job Analysis - Identification of Performance Requirements. The Select21 job analysis 

used performance requirements to define job demands at the Army-wide level and for six target 

MOS.1

 At the Army–wide level, the performance requirements consist of: 

• 19 Army-wide performance dimensions, 

• 59 common tasks, and 

• Anticipated future conditions applicable Army-wide. 

Job-specific demands were defined by: 

• MOS tasks organized into task categories and 

• Anticipated future condition applicable to each of two job clusters 

The results of this job analysis procedure are detailed in the second Product Report in this series: 

Future Army-Wide Soldier Performance Requirements. 

The Measurement Plan. The job analysis defined the scope of the Soldier job that needed 

to be measured. To cover this performance domain, we proposed a series of measures and crosswalked them with the list of performance dimensions identified through the job analysis. It was 

important to include both so-called “can-do” and “will-do” type measures. Measures also 

covered several aspects of organizational fit which are precursors to turnover behavior (e.g., job 

attitudes). Teams were formed to pursue development of the measures identified in the plan and 

for the construction of the specific instruments. 

Army Input and Review. Each measure was prepared with extensive Army involvement. 

Members of the Select21 Subject Matter Expert Panel (a representative group of senior NCOs) 

were briefed in detail on the measures and offered many suggestions. During actual instrument 

development, various workshops were held with Army NCOs to help finalize content. Army

reviewers performed suitability and readability checks of final draft instruments. 

Pilot and Criterion Field Testing: Instruments were pilot tested and reviewed by Soldiers 

and NCOs. A field test, targeting Soldiers from the sample set, was conducted as a final tryout of 

all measures before the concurrent validation planned for 20052

. 

 

1

 These MOS are: 11B (Infantryman), 19D (Cavalry Scout), 19K (Armor Crewman); 31U/25U (Signal Support 

Specialist), 74B/25B (Information Systems Operator/Analyst, and 96B (Intelligence Analyst). The selection and 

grouping of these target MOS is discussed in a companion product report (Product Report 1): Future Job Clusters. 2

 The goal for field testing was to access 640 Soldiers including target MOS Soldiers. However, deployment 

priorities during FY2004 negatively impacted planned troop support requests, particularly in some of the target 

MOS. We are continuing to make adjustments to the research design to correspond with Army operational priorities. 

10 
Other Potential Applications 

The five performance criterion measurement instruments have the potential to be used by 

others in the Army who are looking for tools to assist in measuring Soldier job performance. In 

these applications they should be viewed primarily as diagnostic guides to be used in training, 

counseling, and as supplements to the process of Soldier performance evaluations. Some specific 

considerations are discussed below. 

Job Knowledge Tests. While the job knowledge test questions cannot be released while 

the Select21 Project is still using them as criteria, they may be releasable at a later time. The 

Army-wide content serves as a good diagnostic of Soldier competencies in the Common Task 

areas and could serve to focus training, as a cost-effective preparation for the Common Tasks 

Test (CTT), or used by Soldiers as part of a self-analysis program for promotion or for 

preparation for the Primary Leadership Development Course (PLDC). Although restricted to 

only a small number of Army jobs, the MOS-specific knowledge tests could serve a similar 

purpose. 

Criterion Situational Judgment Test (CSJT). Like the Job Knowledge Tests, the CSJT test 

items are not immediately releasable. In the future, however, these items have the potential to 

serve as excellent training tools in developing awareness in emerging leaders in the areas 

covered – Adaptability, Self-Management, Effort and Initiative, Peer Support, and Teamwork. 

Because of variability and acceptability of responses, they can be used to elicit discussions and 

rationales during leadership training. They are compatible with companion leadership doctrinal 

sources such as FM 7-21.13 (The Soldier’s Guide), FM 7-22.7 (The Noncommissioned Officer 

Guide), and FM 22-100 (Army Leadership: Be, Know, Do). 

Personnel File Form (PFF). The PFF serves as a handy self-analysis worksheet for 

Soldiers who are anticipating promotion. It can also be used as a tool by supervisors in assessing 

and counseling their Solders in areas to concentrate to improve their promotion potential. 

Job Performance Rating Scales. The Current Performance Rating Scales serve as an 

excellent counseling and guidance instrument for supervisors to use in developing their junior 

Soldiers. The areas covered – Professionalism and Personal Discipline, Communication, 

Adaptability, Information Management, Effort and Initiative, Problem Solving and Decision 

Making, Common Task Performance – are all developmental areas of concern for conscientious 

supervisors. The behaviorally anchored examples provide excellent discussion points and allow 

for specific goal-setting for improving Soldier performance in the targeted areas. 

Army Life Survey. The Army Life Survey is a useful tool for measuring overall unit 

cohesion and morale and in identifying problem areas within a unit. Although it measures 

individual Soldier satisfactions, if administered within a unit (company or battalion) and results 

consolidated, it can provide leaders indicators of overall satisfaction indices, many of which are 

locally influenced. Such surveys, administered at regular intervals, provide leaders with 

comparative measures of the attitudes and opinions within the unit. Because of the sensitivity of 

11 
topics and the reliance on candid responses, it is essential that steps be taken to ensure 

respondent anonymity. 

Who is involved in this work? 

Select21 research and products will ultimately result in recommendations to the Assistant 

Secretary of Defense for Manpower and Reserve Affairs. The offices sponsoring this project are 

the Army G-1 and the Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC). The U.S. Army Research 

Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) is conducting the research, largely through 

work performed under contract to the Human Resources Research Organization (HumRRO). 

How to contact us and for more information 

 

Your reactions and suggestions for these Product Reports are important and we solicit 

input and participation in the Select21 project. We also will try to answer any questions you 

might have. If you have any input or want to learn more about Select21 and its current status, 

please contact: 

Dr. Trueman Tremble 

Selection and Assignment Research Unit 

U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences 

2511 Jefferson Davis Highway 

Arlington, VA 22202-3926 

Commercial 703-602-7765 (or DSN 332-7765) 

e-mail trueman.tremble@hqda.army.mil 

 

12